8F 



401 

U3UL 



. m . Issued December 31, 1910 

J. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
BIOLOGICAL SURVEY— BULLETIN No. 36 

HENRY W. HEXSHAW, Chief 



RAISING DEER AND OTHER LARGE GAME 
ANIMALS IN THE UNITED STATES 



BY 



DAVID E. LANTZ 

Assistant, Biological Survey 




WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

1910 





Qass ~S>F40l 

Book " . %I3 La- 



Bui. 36, Biological Survey, U. S. Dept of Agriculture. 



Plate I. 




Issued December 31, 1910 

y. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

BIOLOGICAL SURVEY— BULLETIN No- 36 

HENRY W. HEXSHAW, Chief 



RAISING DEER AND OTHER LARGE GAME 
ANIMALS IN THE UNITED STATES Js± 

7 ?3^ 



BY 



DAVID E. LANTZ 

Assistant, Biological Survey 




WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 



1910 




J 



#%& 



f 



9 13!. 



X 

^ 






jk 

<£ 



LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL. 



U. S. Department of Agriculture, 

Biological Survey, 
Washington, D. C, Oct, 4, 1910. 
Sir: I have the honor to transmit herewith, as Bulletin No. 36 of 
the Biological Survey, the results of an investigation by David E. 
Lantz concerning the practicability and desirability of raising deer 
and other large game animals in the United States. 

In most parts of the country the number of game animals is 
steadily diminishing and game for table use has already become a 
high-priced luxury. Experiments have shown that some species, 
especially of the deer family, can be brought to a state of semidomes- 
tication with comparative ease and can be bred and raised at very 
small cost. The chief purpose of the present bulletin is to call atten- 
tion to the importance of raising elk and deer for venison, to indicate 
the particular species most readily reared in preserves, and to empha- 
size the importance of so modifying state game laws as to encourage 
the use of private effort and capital in making a marketable com- 
modity of venison and placing it within the reach of people of mod- 
erate means. Since the distribution in 1908 of our earlier publica- 
tion on Deer Farming (Farmers' Bulletin 330) several States have 
changed their game laws in the interest of this industry, and as its 
importance becomes known others are sure to follow. 

Attention is again directed to the fact that in many parts of the 
country there are tracts of land of little or no value for agricultural 
purposes which can be more profitably used for raising venison than 
for any other purpose. 

Eespectfully, Henry W. Henshaw, 

Chief, Biological Survey. 
Hon. James Wilson, 

Secretary of Agriculture, 

3 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2010 with funding from 
The Library of Congress 



http://www.archive.org/details/raisingdeerotherOOIant 



CONTENTS. 



Page. 

Introduction 7 

Importance of domesticating mammals 8 

Preservation of species 9 

Use in agriculture and transportation 10 

Use for fur 10 

Use for food 10 

Selection of species for rearing experiments 10 

The pronghorn, or American antelope 11 

Exotic antelopes 13 

The eland 13 

The nylgai 13 

Smaller antelopes 14 

Importance of the deer family 14 

Native deer of North America 16 

Caribou 16 

Moose 18 

Wapiti, or round-horned elk 19 

White-tailed deer 20 

Mule deer 20 

Columbia black-tailed deer 21 

Exotic deer 21 

Altai wapiti 21 

Japanese sika 22 

The Pere David deer 23 

Indian sambar 23 

Axis deer 23 

Small deer 24 

Objections to the introduction of foreign animals 24 

The wapiti, or Rocky Mountain elk 25 

Habits 25 

Elk venison 26 

Preservation of the elk 26 

Wild elk in the eastern United States 27 

Experience in raising elk 28 

Elk in the Ozark Mountains 33 

Management of elk in inclosures 36 

Range 36 

Food , 37 

Fence 37 

Cost of stock 37 

Viciousness of males 38 

The elk as an enemy of wolves and dogs 39 

5 



CONTENTS. 



The whitetail, or Virginia deer 40 

Experiences of breeders 42 

A domesticated herd of deer 44 

Increase of white-tailed deer in domestication 45 

Deer hybrids 45 

Habits and management 46 

Vicious bucks 47 

Capturing live deer for shipment 48 

Wild deer in private preserves 50 

Effect on game supply 51 

Game propagation and game laws 52 

Transportation of live deer 52 

Transportation of venison 52 

Killing deer raised in private parks 53 

Sale of venison 54 

State laws recognizing private ownership of deer 55 

Resolutions by the American Breeders' Association 58 

Summary 59 



ILLUSTRATIONS. 



Page. 

Plate I. Elk herd in the National Zoological Park, Washington, D. C. . Frontispiece. 

II. Elk in the National Zoological Park, Washington, D. C 18 

III. Fig. 1. Feeding time on farm of C. H. Roseberry, Stella, Mo. Fig. 2. 

Mule deer, National Zoological Park, Washington, D. C 20 

IV. Elk in new pasture, near Eureka Springs, Ark 34 

V. Elk park in the Ozarks, showing elimination of underbrush 34 

VI. Tame elk on Indian Rock Game Preserve, owned by C. D. Richard- 
son, West Brookfield, Mass 36 

VII. Virginia deer in park belonging to Thomas Blagden, Saranac Inn, 

Upper Saranac, N. Y 42 

VIII. Fawns of the Virginia deer at Kent Deer Park, home of C. H. Rose- 
berry, Stella, Mo 44 



RAISING DEER AND OTHER LARGE GAME ANIMALS IN THE 

UNITED STATES. 



INTRODUCTION. 

Under present conditions in the United States, game animals of 
most kinds are rapidly diminishing in numbers. As game becomes 
scarcer, legal restrictions upon its pursuit and capture are of neces- 
sity increased to avoid complete extermination. Even after game 
is legally killed, the laws of some States make it impossible for the 
nonresident hunter either to carry the meat home to his family or 
to sell it. In the zeal for protecting our fast vanishing game ani- 
mals, laws have been enacted which, unless modified, will hinder or 
permanently prevent the most important movement for game preser- 
vation yet tried in this country; namely, the propagation of game 
animals, not by the State alone, but by private enterprise as well. 

A few States have recently modified their game laws so as to 
permit, under limitations, the sale of game from private preserves; 
but in many States restrictive laws still prevent the grower of such 
game from marketing it outside the State in which it is produced, 
or within the State except sometimes during a short open season. 
Complaint is made that our game laws favor sportsmen of means 
and are unfavorable to the farmer and to those citizens who, while 
themselves debarred from the pleasures of the chase, would like 
occasionally to have game on their own tables. If they could pur- 
chase venison grown in preserves, it would remove cause for com- 
plaint, and the traffic could be so regulated as not to hinder but to 
aid the protection of wild game. 

It is here urged that if the natural resources of the country are 
the heritage of the people, they should be conserved for the benefit 
of all. If private enterprise can help in game preservation, it should 
be allowed to profit from investments. The propagation of game is 
as legitimate a business as the growing of beef or mutton; and the 
producer should be permitted, under reasonable regulations, to dis- 
pose of his product at any time, either for breeding purposes or for 
food. 

The present bulletin discusses briefly the importance of domesti- 
cating wild mammals and the economic objects to be gained by the 
process. It calls attention to the species, especially those of the deer 

7 



8 RAISING DEEE IN THE UNITED STATES. 

family, most promising for experiments in meat production, and 
relates successful experience in different sections of the United States 
with the wapiti, or Rocky Mountain elk, and with the Virginia deer. 
It discusses the relation of game laws to the business of growing 
venison — a business which, it is believed, with proper encouragement 
may be made highly profitable, especially since it will be the means 
of utilizing much otherwise unproductive land. 

IMPORTANCE OF DOMESTICATING MAMMALS. 

The question of practical benefits to be derived from domesticating 
more species of mammals than we now have is by no means settled. 
It is claimed by some that the present list of domesticated kinds is 
ample for all economic requirements of the human race ; that, so far 
as beasts of burden are concerned, we already have enough suited to 
every necessity; and, furthermore, that mechanical ingenuity is fast 
bringing us to a time when fewer kinds will be required. As to 
food animals, we are told that the excellence of our beef, pork, and 
mutton leaves nothing further to be desired. For clothing, it is said 
that the wools and hairs produced by mammals already under do- 
mestication amply supplement the vegetable fibers. 

On the other side, we have the argument advanced by the French 
zoologist, E. Trouessart, to the effect that mankind should now make 
every effort to domesticate as many species of mammals as possible. 
He argues that in the course of time the extensive use of electricity 
and machinery must inevitably exhaust the coal, petroleum, and 
natural gas from the earth's crust, and that mankind will again be 
forced to rely largely upon the labor of animals. He urges immedi- 
ate action because of the imminent danger of extermination of some 
of the species. 

Between these opposite views a middle ground may be maintained. 
Admitting that we have enough beasts of burden and as great a 
variety of animal food as the actual necessities of man demand, we 
still find excellent reasons for desiring to increase the number of 
species under domestication. While it is neither necessary nor de- 
sirable to domesticate every mammal possible, the field for choice is 
large. Preliminary to choosing a species its ultimate usefulness 
must be considered. In reply to the oft-repeated argument that it 
takes so much time to develop a domestic species that the probable 
economic advantage will be overbalanced by the enormous expense 
required, it is enough to recall the fact that many wild animals show 
remarkable adaptability to the conditions imposed by domesticity. 
Canada geese, for instance, reared from the eggs of wild parents 
and kept with barnyard fowls show hardly any trace of wildness. 

a Bulletin de la Societe d'Acclimatation for 1900, pp. 33-52, 1900. 



DOMESTICATING WILD MAMMALS. 9 

Young mammals of various kinds when caught wild and reared in 
captivity become absolutely tame and tractable. If these tame indi- 
viduals can be bred successfully, there would seem to be few obstacles 
in the way of domesticating the species. 

However, the problems of domestication are not quite so simple 
as the above statement might imply. It must be remembered that 
captivity and changes of environment often make wild animals 
peculiarly susceptible to disease. These and other considerations 
complicate the problems, whose solution, after all, will depend mainly 
upon the patience of the experimenter. 

In considering the reasons for domesticating wild animals and 
plants, the aesthetic one should not be overlooked. A large number 
of the species that have come under human control have been tamed 
for the pleasure they afford to their owners. This is true of flower- 
ing and other ornamental plants, and of some birds — for instance, 
the canary. Probably this consideration always has weight in the 
selection of species and individuals for breeding, and it must have 
a marked influence in deciding the fitness of wild species of mam- 
mals for domestication. 

Experiments in breeding wild mammals need not necessarily be 
with a view to complete domestication. The animals may be bred in 
inclosures giving sufficient range and a habitat as nearly natural as 
circumstances will permit, and the problems of ultimate domestica- 
tion may be left for future determination. By this means the prac- 
tical economic results of full domestication may be largely antici- 
pated before the completion of the process, and the dangers incident 
to close captivity may be happily avoided. 

The chief practical objects to be sought by breeding wild mammals 
in captivity are: (1) Preservation of species, (2) use in agriculture 
or transportation, (3) use for hides and fur, and (4) use for food. 

PRESERVATION OF SPECIES. 

The rapacity of man has often threatened the existence of valuable 
animals. The danger of extinction of the American buffalo, the 
African elephant, the eland, the walrus, the sea otter, and other 
species is not imaginary. Within recent times several species of 
birds have been lost to the world. Of mammals the quagga and the 
blaubok {Hippotragus leucophceus) , the latter a small relative of 
the roan antelope, have been exterminated in South Africa. Fore- 
sight might have preserved them, and foresight, aided by govern- 
mental intervention, will be needed to prevent the loss of many 
of the larger game animals of the world. Their preservation is in 
itself a sufficient reason for attempting their partial or complete 
domestication. 

63030°— Bull. 36—10 2 



10 RAISING DEER IN THE UNITED STATES. 

USE IN AGRICULTURE AND TRANSPORTATION. 

The need of more kinds of beasts of burden is not great. The horse 
will never be surpassed in general usefulness in this capacity, and the 
other animals used in agriculture and commerce are excellent in their 
places. However, there are parts of the world where for special 
reasons the domestication of species of the native fauna might be 
of immense advantage to the people. The zebra and the elephant for 
Africa and the caribou for arctic America are examples. 

REARING MAMMALS EOR THEIR EUR. 

An important object to be attained by the rearing of wild mammals 
is the permanence and increase of our supply of furs. The growing 
scarcity of the better kinds of fur and the consequent high prices 
make the problem of domesticating fur-bearing animals of immense 
economic importance, while present conditions promise good returns 
to those who solve it. The beaver, the otter, the marten, the mink, 
the silver-gray fox, and the blue fox are among the mammals whose 
partial domestication and successful breeding would prove profitable. 

REARING MAMMALS FOR THEIR ELESH. 

From the economic point of view, the strongest argument for breed- 
ing mammals in captivity lies in their utility as food. For successful 
game propagation a less degree of domestication in mammals will 
suffice than when they are reared for fur or for use in agriculture and 
transportation. This circumstance greatly favors the game propa- 
gator. Besides, there is little probability that breeding game as an 
industry will ever be overdone ; the demand for the product is likely 
to keep pace with the supply. 

SELECTION OF SPECIES FOR REARING EXPERIMENTS. 

The larger game quadrupeds are the first to suggest themselves as 
suitable for propagation for food. The majority of our domestic 
mammals belong to the order of hoofed animals (Ungulata), and of 
these the most valuable food species are in the cloven-hoofed division 
(Artiodactyla). Pigs, goats, sheep, and oxen belong to this sub- 
order ; and to the wild members of this group we naturally look for 
additions to the list of domestic food animals.* 

The number of animals available for rearing experiments is quite 
large; but from any complete list of those adapted to a particular 
country a number of promising species would be rejected as super- 
fluous. As a rule the kinds native to a region should have first con- 
sideration, since they need no acclimatizing. The selection of a for- 
eign species for breeding must depend upon a similarity between its 
natural and its proposed habitat or upon its probable adaptability to 



THE PRONGHORN. 11 

the new environment. Adaptation may sometimes be judged from 
the history of former attempts to acclimatize it or its near relatives. 
In a country so extensive and varied as the United States the same 
principles should be considered before transferring a native species 
from one locality to another. 

Some of the large game mammals whose partial domestication in 
the United States has been favored are briefly considered under the 
following subheads: 

THE PRONGHORN, OR AMERICAN ANTELOPE. 

The pronghorn (Antilocapra ameriean<£) is a game animal not 
closely related to any other living form. While its general characters 
ally it, as well as the antelopes of the Old World, to the cattle and 
sheep family (Bovidse), it differs from other living ruminants in its 
deciduous and forked horn sheaths, and is usually considered as the 
type of a distinct family. 

A half century ago the range of the pronghorn in the plains region 
extended from the valley of the Missouri River westward to the Cas- 
cades and from the Saskatchewan in latitude 53° north, south- 
ward to the Mexican border. In Mexico the species is represented by 
a paler local race. The eastern limit of the original range of the 
antelope is not definitely known. According to Baird it was 
abundant in Minnesota on the plains of the Red River in 1850,° and 
it still occurred in the southwestern counties of that State in the early 
eighties. Pike found it common in eastern Kansas in 1806. The 
statements of the explorers of the plains indicate that it was about as 
abundant as the buffalo, although not seen in such vast herds. 

The present distribution and numbers of the pronghorn are a sad 
commentary upon earlier game protection in the West. A few fugi- 
tive bands are now to be found in the cattle country from longitude 
101° westward. The story of their decrease in all of the States is 
practically repeated in the statements of D. C. Nowlin, state game 
warden of Wyoming, in his annual report for 1906. He says that 
antelope have decreased to an alarming extent throughout the State ; 
for instance, in three years the Green River herd had diminished 
from about 6,000 to less than 2,000 head. Hundreds had perished 
through lack of food during storms, by depredations of wild animals, 
and through slaughter by Ute Indians. He repeats the recommenda- 
tion of previous reports that the legislature should prohibit all kill- 
ing of antelope for a term of years. 

In 1909 the legislature of Wyoming at last heeded the repeated 
recommendations of the game warden by passing a law protecting 

a Report U. S. Com. Patents (Agriculture) for 1851, p. 121, 1852. 



12 RAISING DEER IN THE UNITED STATES. 

antelope until 1915. Two other States — Montana and Nevada — 
passed laws in 1909 protecting antelope indefinitely. Washington 
still has an open season, but the animals are practically extinct in 
that State. Three Canadian Provinces — Alberta, Manitoba, and 
Saskatchewan — have open seasons; and of these, Manitoba has had 
none of the animals for more than twenty years. 

In the United States antelope are now protected in every State 
in which they occur. The close season in Arizona expires March 1, 
1911; in Colorado, September 25, 1912; Kansas, March 13, 1918; 
New Mexico, March 18, 1914; North Dakota, January 1, 1920; Okla- 
homa, November 1, 1914; South Dakota, January 1, 1911; Texas, 
July 1, 1912; Utah, March 11, 1913; and Wyoming, September 25, 
1915. 

Experience shows that the antelope does not do well in close con- 
finement. In zoological gardens it is short lived and seldom breeds. 
Judge J. D. Caton made a number of efforts to raise antelope in his 
park at Ottawa, 111., but the animals died within a year. a Other 
breeders have had similar experience. The difficulty seems to be that 
of providing a natural environment. Judge Caton stated that the 
antelope loses its timidity sooner and more completely than any 
other wild animal whose domestication he had attempted. "When 
taken young it soon acquires the attachment of a child for the human 
species, and when captured adult in a short time becomes so tame 
that it will take food from the hand, and follow one by the hour 
walking through the grounds." None of Judge Caton's antelope 
bred, and he concluded that the climate was too humid, and that his 
pasture lacked the vegetation essential to their health. 

The experience of those who have tried to rear the antelope outside 
its natural range should not deter those who are favorably situated 
from undertaking further experiments with it. Visitors to Yellow- 
stone National Park have been greatly surprised at the tameness of 
the antelope herds. Many western ranchmen have successfully reared 
the young. The animals were allowed perfect freedom, but could 
not be driven from the premises where they were fed. Reared in 
natural surroundings, unconfined, and with sufficient range, they 
would undoubtedly thrive and increase. In a few years by careful 
and continued taming of the young, one might secure a herd of abso- 
lutely tame antelope. Antelope require only a slight fence to con- 
fine them. They run very swiftly, but unless closely pressed will not 
jump an ordinary fence. » 

The flesh of the young antelope is said to be much superior to ordi- 
nary venison. That of mature animals, particularly the males, has 
a strong flavor; but this might be greatly improved under domesti- 

°American Naturalist, X, 197, 1876. 



EXOTIC ANTELOPES. 13 

cation. A full-grown pronghorn weighs from 100 to 125 pounds, 
and will dress from 65 to 80 pounds. 

EXOTIC ANTELOPES. 

The Old TTorld antelopes belong to the family of Bovida 3 . and 
include many yaluable food animals. In Africa alone over a hun- 
dred species occur, many of them hardy and most of them excellent 
game. Fully a score of species would be promising subjects for ac- 
climatizing in America. Africa, like our own country, has arid 
sections, and some of her antelopes are probably especially adapted 
to the desert lands of our Southwest, and might be used to restock 
parts of that region from which our own pronghorn has been exter- 
minated. Some years ago a society was organized for the purpose 
of introducing the gazelle into southern California, but no practical 
results followed. 

THE ELAND. 

The eland (Taurotragus). the largest of the antelope family, is 
threatened with extermination over the greater part of its range in 
South Africa. Its average weight is from 800 to 1,100 pounds, and 
old males have been known to attain a weight of 1,400 to 1,500 
pounds. This animal has often been recommended for rearing in 
captivity because of the excellence of its flesh, which is superior to 
beef. Harris, the African traveler, states that while it resembles 
beef in grain and color, it is far better flavored and more delicate, 
possessing a pure game flavor and remarkable for the quantity of fat 
interlarded between the muscles. 

The eland was introduced into Holland by the Prince of Orange 
in 1783. It was acclimatized in England by the Earl of Derby in 
1842, and was bred successfully in his parks. After his death the 
herd passed into possession of the London Zoological Society in 1851, 
and continued to increase in numbers for many years. In 1899 the 
Duke of Bedford had a fine herd of 14 elands in the park at Woburn 
Abbey. 

The scarcity of this game animal in a wild state and the conse- 
quent cost of obtaining stock would probably make experiments in 
breeding it in the United States so expensive as to prohibit the 
attempt by individual enterprise. However, the experience with 
the animal in Europe gives assurance that, if properly undertaken, 
efforts to acclimatize it in the United States would be successful. 

THE NILGAI. 

The nilgai (Boselaphus tragocamelus) of India is, next to the 
eland, the largest of antelope. The animal is ungainly in appear- 
ance, and its flesh is somewhat inferior to that of the eland, but its 



14 RAISING DEEE IN THE UNITED STATES. 

size, its hardiness, and its lack of wildness commend it as a species 
suitable for domestication. It stands long droughts extremely well, 
and its flesh is equal to most venison in quality. 

Nilgais were first taken to England in 1767. In 1862 a dozen of the 
animals were introduced into the park of Signor Comba at Mandria, 
Italy. In ten years the herd increased to 172 head. A small herd 
is kept by the Duke of Bedford at Woburn Abbey, England. In 
the National Zoological Park, the Philadelphia Zoological Gardens, 
and the New York Zoological Park these animals have done well and 
bred regularly. 

SMALLER ANTELOPES. 

Some of the smaller members of the antelope tribe are excellent 
subjects for experiments in acclimatization and breeding in the 
United States. Among them are the gazelles of Asia and Africa, 
the duikers, the springbuck, and the roan antelope of Africa, and 
the Indian antelope, or black buck. Of the duikers (Cephalophus) 
there are over twenty kinds, ranging in size from that of a medium- 
sized donkey to that of a hare; and all are said to afford excellent 
venison, while some of them are known to be easily tamed. The 
Indian antelope, or black buck, has been bred in many zoological 
gardens, and a herd is kept in the park at Woburn Abbey. It is 
easily tamed, but, as is the case with many deer and antelope, the 
tame males become ill-tempered in the pairing season. In the Phila- 
delphia and New York Zoological parks these animals have thrived 
and increased rapidly. 

IMPORTANCE OF THE DEER FAMILY. 

The deer family (Cervidse) stands next to the cattle and sheep 
family (Bovidse) in general utility. The flesh is a valuable food, 
while the antlers or horns, as well as the skins, are important articles 
of commerce. Venison was more common than beef on the tables of 
medieval Europe, and was the flesh most commonly eaten by early 
settlers and frontiersmen in North America. Its dietetic value is 
enhanced by the fact that it is especially adapted to invalids who 
require a nourishing yet easily digested food. 

In a recently published table showing the time required to digest 
various foods, grilled venison is given first rank with boiled tripe and 
boiled rice, as requiring but one hour for complete digestion. 
Whipped raw eggs, boiled barley, and boiled trout, as well as 
asparagus and a few other vegetables, require an hour and a half. 
Grilled beefsteak and mutton require three hours for digestion, while 
grilled or roasted veal and pork require five hours, or even more. a 

a Scientific American, CI., 46, July 17, 1909. 



ECONOMIC IMPORTANCE OF DEER. 15 

Except in a few species like the caribou, only male deer have 
antlers. Although these horns are deciduous, they are solid processes 
produced from the frontal bone, and have the physical as well as the 
chemical properties of true bone. They are of two general types— 
those more or less broad and flat and those rounded in shape. Those 
of the flattened type are usually the more massive, but the rounded 
antlers of the wapiti are exceptionally heavy. 

Deerhorn has several uses. It produces much gelatin by decoction, 
the product being like that from most animal substances. The rasp- 
ings and waste pieces of the horns used in manufacturing knife 
handles are either made into gelatin or boiled down into size used in 
cloth manufacture. At one time deerhorn was a prominent source of 
ammonia. 

The principal use of deerhorn is in the manufacture of handles for 
knives, forks, and other instruments. In Sheffield, England, some 
thirty years ago, about 500 tons of deerhorn were used annually in 
manufacture. India and Ceylon furnished about four-fifths of this 
material, while about 100 tons came from European and English deer 
forests. The 500 tons represented the antlers of fully 350,000 deer of 
various species. a In Europe buckhorn is worked up into many useful 
articles, as umbrella stands, chandeliers, and ornaments for personal 
wear. 

The use of deerskins is well known. As tanned and dressed by 
the American Indians they are manufactured into a variety of useful 
and ornamental articles. The inhabitants of some of the Indian 
villages of the North derive a good income from their manufactures 
of deerskins into moccasins, rackets, toboggans, and other things 
for sale. Deer hide makes an excellent leather, its value depending 
upon the size as well as upon the species from which it comes. The 
skins of wapiti, for instance, are porous, and the leather does not 
wear well, while those of the moose and European elk are so thick 
and hard that the leather is said to have resisted musket balls. In 
Sweden in former times a pair of elk-hide breeches went as a legacy 
through several generations of peasants. Formerly about 200,000 
deerskins from North America were sold annually in the London 
market. Half of these were skins of the wapiti. Many were bought 
for Germany and there manufactured into leggings, but the heavier 
skins were tanned and manufactured in England. In recent years 
the export of deerskins from America has fallen off greatly. 

Deer hair has a peculiar cellular structure, and is used in some 
parts of the world for stuffing saddles, for which purpose it is espe- 
cially suited. 

a Siinmonds, P. L„ Animal Products, p. 1S2 (not dated). 



16 RAISING DEER IF THE UNITED STATES. 

NATIVE DEER OF NORTH AMERICA. 

North America, is comparatively rich in species of deer. All of 
them are valuable food animals, and nearly all have been of great 
commercial and economic value during the development of the 
country. While their commercial importance has been greatly les- 
sened as their numbers diminished, they still play an important 
part in furnishing food in newly settled parts of the United States 
and Canada, as well as in feeding the native tribes in the far North. 
Except in States that have extensive forested areas and have pro- 
tected deer for a series of years, they are rapidly disappearing be- 
fore the encroachments of agriculture. The remnant are valuable 
chiefly because they are a natural resource which may be indefinitely 
developed if carefully husbanded. It is believed that with partial 
domestication and careful management in state and private game 
preserves, deer of most of our species may again become abundant. 
Considering the difficulties, attempts to domesticate them have been 
fairly satisfactory. 

THE CARIBOU. 

Several species and local races of the caribou, or reindeer, inhabit 
the northern part of North America. According to habitat, they 
fall naturally into two groups. The more northern, ranging beyond 
the forests, is best represented by the barren-ground caribou (Rangi- 
fer arcticus). The second group inhabits the forested area south of 
the other, and its most important representative is the woodland 
caribou (Rangifer caribou). Although they differ little from the 
wild Old World reindeer (Rangifer tarandus) in habits and gen- 
eral appearance, no attempts to domesticate the American reindeer 
seem to have been made. The larger woodland caribou is said to be 
exceedingly wild and timid, and for this reason its suitability for 
domestication has been questioned. The barren-ground species, al- 
though small, appears to be much less wild. 

Prof. S. F. Baird was strongly of the opinion that American cari- 
bou of both groups are as capable of domestication as the European 
species, and he suggested that such a step would be of vast benefit to 
Indians of the North. Its success would at once place these people 
beyond the vicissitudes which are so rapidly sweeping them off. In 
the end they might " become a pastoral people, and possibly, in time, 
as agricultural as the nature of the seasons would admit." a 

In the same paper from which the above quotation is taken Pro- 
fessor Baird suggested further that the domesticated European rein- 
deer might itself be successfully imported and propagated in North 

a Report U. S. Com. Patents (Agriculture) for 1851, p. 108, 1852. 



THE CARIBOU. 17 

America, and that thus the loss of time in attempts to domesticate a 
wild species might be avoided. After the purchase of Alaska by the 
United States, the introduction of firearms among the natives led to 
such slaughter of game that actual starvation threatened some of the 
tribes. In 1887 Charles H. Townsend advised that the Government 
should import the reindeer and teach the natives how to care for 
and use the animals. In 1891 the late Dr. Sheldon Jackson, gen- 
eral agent in Alaska of the Bureau of Education, aided by dona- 
tions from private sources, purchased a small herd of reindeer 
abroad. They arrived in Alaska in 1892. Since 1894 Congress has 
made annual appropriations for continuing the experiment. Up to 
and including 1904, the total number of reindeer imported from 
Siberia and Scandinavia was 1,280, and at that time the herds num- 
bered over 8,000. The net annual increase since importations ceased 
has been about 25 per cent. In 1907 the herds numbered 15,839 
animals and the present number is probably not less than 23,000. 
The introduction of these animals has already proved to be of im- 
mense benefit to the natives, who have been taught how to manage 
them by herders from Lapland and Finland, brought to America for 
this service. 

Through the efforts of Doctor Grenfell, Lapland reindeer have re- 
cently been introduced into Labrador and northern Newfoundland, 
and the experiment promises great success. W. J. Carroll, of St. 
Johns, Newfoundland, in commenting on the work of Doctor Gren- 
fell, says : 

" It is to be hoped that the introduction of reindeer will be the 
first step toward the domestication of our own caribou. With a 
quarter of a million of caribou running wild in the interior, increasing 
at the rate of 10,000 yearly, it will be seen that when Newfoundland 
wakes up to the possibilities of its caribou herds we will not only be 
able to have thousands of deer for commercial purposes, but also will 
have enough to keep this island a paradise for hunters when hunting 
big game on the continent becomes a thing of the past. As an in- 
stance of how they increase and multiply, Doctor Grenfell thinks 
his herd will be increased by 200 fawns this spring." a 

While the domestication of the American caribou has been made 
less important by the introduction of the reindeer, good reasons for 
breeding the native animals still remain. They would probably be 
especially useful for crossing with the Old World species. The cross 
with the woodland caribou would doubtless produce animals of 
greater size and strength, and the native caribou could constantly 
be drawn upon for new blood, just as has often been done in the case 
of the wild reindeer of northern Europe and Siberia. 

a Forest and Stream, LXX, 611, April 18, 1908. 
63030°— Bull. 36—10 3 



18 RAISING DEER IN THE UNITED STATES. 

THE MOOSE. 

The largest living animal of the deer family is the moose, repre- 
sented in America by a widely distributed species {Aloes americana) . 
The Alaskan moose, on account of its great size, has been described 
as a separate species {Aloes gigas). The European elk {Aloes 
yiachlis) differs but slightly from the common moose of North 
America. 

The moose is still found in some of the wooded parts of Canada, 
from Nova Scotia and New Brunswick to Manitoba, its range extend- 
ing into the United States in northern Maine, Michigan, and Minne- 
sota. In the Eocky Mountain region it ranges from northwestern 
Wyoming northwestward into Alaska. It is still fairly abundant 
in parts of Alaska and in British Columbia. Under a careful system 
of protection moose have slowly increased in numbers in Maine. A 
promising attempt has been made to reintroduce them into the Adi- 
rondacks, where they were exterminated nearly fifty years ago. 

Perhaps no other American deer is naturally so well adapted to 
domestication as the moose. Professor Baird relates that a pair of 
the animals were kept by a man living near Houlton, Me. These 
had been trained to draw a sleigh, " which they did with great steadi- 
ness and swiftness, subject, however, to the inconvenience that, when 
they once took it into their heads to cool themselves in a neighboring 
river or lake, no effort could prevent them." a Audubon relates 
another instance of a moose's being trained to draw a sleigh. We are 
informed by a number of writers that the European species was in 
former times fully domesticated in northern Scandinavia and, like the 
reindeer, was used to carry couriers from place to place. They were 
swifter than reindeer and have been known to draw a sleigh 234 miles 
in a day. It is said that this use of elk was finally forbidden under 
heavy penalties on account of their having been employed to facili- 
tate the escape of prisoners or suspected criminals, and the domestica- 
tion of the animals was consequently abandoned. 

Dr. W. T. Hornaday says of the moose that in captivity "it is 
docile; not foolishly nervous like most deer, but steady, confiding, 
and affectionate. Moose are easily handled and trained to drive in 
harness, and in contact with man manifest more common sense than 
any other species of deer with which I am acquainted." & 

In spite of this natural tendency to tameness, the efforts that have 
been made to keep moose in confinement have nearly all failed. A 
pair were kept in the Cincinnati Zoological Garden for about five 
years, but this experience is exceptional. Dr. Hornaday expresses 

a Report U. S. Com. Patents (Agriculture) for 1851, p. 115, 1852. 
6 The American Natural History, p. 141, 1904. 



Bui. 36, Biological Survey, U. S Dept. of Agriculture. 



Plate II 




o 




THE WAPITI. 19 

the belief that the failure is largely due to lack of vigorous daily 
exercise, which he thinks vitally necessary for the proper digestion 
and assimilation of their food.® Others have suggested that most of 
the experiments have been made outside of the natural range of 
moose, and that the climate was too warm for them. On the other 
hand, individual moose reared away from the parent cow have done 
well as long as they had the freedom of the forest ; and in large pre- 
serves, such as the Blue Mountain Park in New Hampshire, the 
animals are said to thrive and increase. The difficulties in the way 
of raising them within their natural range are by no means insur- 
mountable, and the practicability of breeding them when confined to 
forested areas within the Canadian life zone has been proved. 

THE WAPITI. 

The round-horned elk of North America are best represented by 
the Rocky Mountain wapiti (Cervus canadensis) (Plates I and II) ; 
but, besides the typical form, two species and a geographic race 
occur. 

Next to the moose, the wapiti or elk is the largest American deer. 
Though not a true elk, the name has become too firmly fixed in our 
vernacular for change. This magnificent game animal was once 
abundant over a large part of the United States, and extended its 
range northward in northwest Canada to about latitude 60° in the 
Peace River region. Southward it ranged to the southern Alleghe- 
nies, northern Texas, southern New Mexico, Arizona, and California. 
The limits of its range eastward were the Adirondacks, western New 
Jersey, and eastern Pennsylvania. Westward it occurred to the 
Pacific Ocean. 

At present the range of the elk has so far diminished that, out- 
side of the larger herds left in the Yellowstone National Park and 
the mountainous country surrounding it, the animals occur only in 
a few scattered localities. The herds in the national park and its 
vicinity are said to number about 30,000 head. Smaller numbers of 
the elk still occur in Colorado, Idaho, western Montana, western 
Oregon, northwestern California, and the Olympic Mountains in 
Washington. A remnant of the dwarf species of southern California 
is left in the upper San Joaquin Valley. Outside the United States, 
a few elk remain in southern Manitoba, Alberta, and on Vancouver 
Island. 

In addition to the wild herds, a considerable number of elk are 
left in private game preserves and parks, as well as in nearly all 
public zoological gardens and parks of the United States. These 
form the nucleus from which, with good management, we may expect 

ffi Hornaday, Wm. T., The American Natural History, p. 141, 1904. 



20 RAISING DEER IN THE UNITED STATES. 

a restocking of some of the former ranges of the elk, and from which 
also a profitable business of raising the animals for market may be 
developed. At the present time no other member of the deer family 
seems to offer so promising a field for ventures in breeding for profit. 
Details of management and records of experience in breeding the elk 
will be given in another part of this bulletin. 

WHITE-TAILED DEER. 

The common deer of the United States is the whitetail, or Virginia, 
deer {Odocoileus virginianus) . The species is widely distributed 
and, including the half dozen geographic races that occur within 
our borders, the range of this deer includes nearly all the United 
States, except large parts of Utah, Arizona, California, Oregon, 
and Washington. It is extinct in Delaware and practically so in sev- 
eral States of the Middle West; but it is still fairly common over 
the greater part of its original range. A number of nearly related 
species occur south of our borders. 

The whitetail is the best known of our native deer and has been 
bred in semidomestication in many localities. Its suitability for 
parks is unquestioned, and in large preserves it increases very rapidly. 
It has not always done well, owing to diseases, but the difficulties 
in the way of rearing it successfully are not greater than those that 
attend the management of some of our domestic animals. Its habits 
and management are discussed later. 

MULE DEER. 

The mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) (Plate III, fig. 2) is larger 
than the whitetail, and, though less widely distributed than that 
species, had originally a vast range on the western side of the con- 
tinent. Including the six subspecies, or geographic races, it occurred 
from the Missouri Kiver westward to California and southward into 
Lower California and Sonora. East of the Continental Divide its 
range extended north into British Columbia, Alberta, and other 
provinces to latitude 56° or 57°, and south into Texas. This range 
has been greatly diminished by the encroachments of settlements 
and the lack of protecting laws, but the animals are still fairly com- 
mon in scattered localities except in the open plains country. 

Outside of its natural range the mule deer has seldom thrived. 
Indeed, many of the attempts to acclimatize it east of the Mississippi 
have failed. In zoological gardens the animals often die of dis- 
eases of the digestive organs, but in several places they do fairly 
well and have bred. They seem to have been thoroughly acclima- 
tized in the large park belonging to the late William C. Whitney, 



Bui. 36, Biological Survey, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 



Plate 111. 





Exotic deer. 21 

near Lenox, Mass., and they have bred regularly and done well in 
a small paddock at Craw for dsville, Ind. 

The mule deer has been crossed with the Virginia and other deer, 
and hybrids with the southern Virginia deer have shown a superiority 
over that race in size and stamina. The hybridizing experiments al- 
ready made give promise of an unexpected usefulness for the mule 
deer in captivity. Aside from the difficulty of acclimatizing it in 
humid regions, no unfavorable circumstances concerning it are known. 
It is prolific, its venison is excellent, and its superior size adds to its 
value as a market animal. 

COLUMBIA BLACK-TAILED DEER. 

The Columbia black-tailed deer {Odocoileus columbianus) is 
smaller than the mule deer or the typical Virginia deer. With its 
two geographic races it inhabits the Pacific coast west of the Cas- 
cades in northern California, Oregon, Washington, and British Co- 
lumbia to southern Alaska. Although its home is in a humid country, 
it has resisted nearly all efforts to introduce it into the eastern United 
States, and the managers of zoological parks and gardens have about 
abandoned attempts to keep it. If not closely confined, it does well in 
parks and preserves within its natural range. 

EXOTIC DEER. 

Several species of exotic deer have been acclimatized in America ; 
and, since the vast extent of our territory affords a great variety of 
conditions, it is probable that many more species could be successfully 
introduced and bred in suitable localities. The red deer and the fal- 
low deer of Europe seem to be well adapted to diverse climates, and 
are now to be found thriving in parks in many parts of the world, 
including the United States. A few other species whose habits and 
general usefulness commend them as excellent subjects for domestica- 
tion are here named. 

THE ALTAI WAPITI. 

This wapiti (Cervus asiatwvs) a occurs in the Altai and Thian Shan 
mountains, and is one of the few deer that have been extensively kept 
in semidomestication. Large herds of these animals were formerly 
trapped in inclosures in the Altai Mountains and are kept in captivity 
for the sake of their antlers, which are cut when in the velvet and ex- 
ported to China for use in medicine. About 6,000 of the animals 
are said to be in captivity, but owing to their destruction by hunters, 

a The proper scientific names of many exotic deer are in donbt. In this and 
one or two other instances the names here adopted are those used by Lydekker 
in his recent books on big game. 



22 RAISING DEER IN THE UNITED STATES. 

wild wapiti of this species are now rare. Although this wapiti is 
smaller than the American species, the antlers are much larger. They 
sell at about 15 roubles ($7.50) a pound, and a single pair sometimes 
brings 120 roubles ($60) . a 

The Altai wapiti has been kept in parks in various parts of 
Europe, notably at Woburn Abbey, where the Duke of Bedford in 
1896 introduced three stags and several hinds, purchased from Mr. 
Hagenbeck, of Hamburg. They have done well, but are in no way 
superior to the American wapiti, with which they interbreed. The 
Altai wapiti has bred in the Philadelphia Zoological Gardens. 

THE JAPANESE SIKA. 

Experiments in breeding the Japanese sika (Pseudaxis nippon) in 
Europe and America show that it is one of the most promising of 
the deer family for park purposes. It inhabits northern China, 
Manchuria, and Japan, but the Japanese race has been oftenest the 
subject of experiments in breeding. 

One of the earliest to try this species in European parks was Vis- 
count Powerscourt, of Powerscourt, in Wicklow, Ireland. In 1860 
he purchased from Jamrach, the London dealer, a stag and three 
hinds and removed them to his estate, where they throve and multi- 
plied greatly. In 1884, after twenty-four years of breeding and in- 
crease, his herd consisted of over 100 individuals, although 2 or 3 
yearly had been shot, many given away, and others sold. Several 
deer parks in Ireland, England, and Scotland were stocked with this 
species from Powerscourt, and the animals thrived well in every place 
to which they were taken. 

In 1879' Lord Powerscourt wrote : 

Japanese deer require no care of any kind ; they are as hardy as fallow or 
red deer, and the venison is as good. We had a haunch last year with more 
than 2 inches of fat on it. The haunches are small and of a handy size. 6 

Again, in 1884, he said : 

These pretty little deer are the only [introduced] ones which have multiplied, 
and have also never required any shelter of any kind, nor any winter feeding, ex- 
cept what the ordinary red deer and fallow deer get, such as hay, etc. * * * 
The Japanese deer here have undoubtedly interbred with the red deer ; there are 
three or four deer in the park here which are certainly hybrids, the red hind in 
each case being the dam. The Japanese are a most satisfactory little deer ; the 
venison when dressed is about the size of Welsh mutton and very well flavored. 
The little stags, with their black coats and thick necks, like miniature sambur, 
are very picturesque and ornamental, aud I think they are a decided addition to 
our varieties of hardy park deer. Some of them are always to be seen in the 
Society's gardens, but these give no idea of the beauty of the animals when in a 
wild state in a park. 

a Lydekker, R., Great and Small Game of Europe, Asia, and America, p. 67, 1901. 

6 Proc. Zool. Soc. London for 1879, p. 294, 1879. 

« Proc. Zool. Soc. London for 1884, pp. 208, 208, 1884. 



EXOTIC DEER. *3 

Although the Japanese sika will take boughs when offered, it is 
chieflv a grazing animal. It is a rough feeder and thrives on the same 
food that cattle eat. The fact that it nourishes in the humid climates 
of Ireland and the Hawaiian Islands shows that it would probably do 
equally well in almost all parts of the United States. It has been 
successfully bred in most of the zoological parks of this country, and 
no obstacle to its successful propagation in open parks is known. 

The Peking sika (Pseudaxis hortulorum) is larger than the Jap- 
anese species, much more vividly colored in summer, and judging 
from the experience of the Duke of Bedford with his herd at Wo- 
burn, it also is admirably adapted for private parks m humid parts 
of our country. 

THE PERE DAVID DEER. 

The Pere David deer {Elaphurus davidianus) is mentioned here 
because the species is now unknown in a wild state. When discovered 
by Pere David none were known outside of the herds m the Imperial 
Park of the Emperor of China. The subsequent destruction of the 
imperial herds in 1894 left the few individuals that had been taken to 
Europe, and their progenv, the only known living representatives of 
the species. It is now thought that the herd at Woburn Abbey are 
the sole survivors. They seem to be thoroughly acclimatized there 
and to be increasing from year to year. 

INDIAN SAMBAR. 

The Indian sambar (Cervus unicolor) is a large species with 
several geographic races. Although Lord Powerscourt failed to 
acclimatize these animals in his park in Ireland, they nourish at 
Woburn Abbey, where they are kept in the open. At Powerscourt 
the dense thickets and lack of sunshine were fatal to these deer. 
The species does well in zoological gardens and public parks, and 
it has often been recommended for private preserves. Like the 
' wapiti, the male is vicious during the rutting season. 

AXIS DEER, OR CHITAL. 

The chital or spotted deer (Cervus axis) of India and Ceylon is 
one of the handsomest of ruminants. It is one of the few deer that 
is spotted with white throughout the year. The species has been 
successfully bred in European parks and in zoological gardens m 
many parts of the world. Although native to a warm country, it 
does well in England and the United States. At Woburn Abbey 
the herd is always in good condition. Its beauty makes it very 
desirable for parks. Unlike our native deer it sheds its horns irregu- 
larly and breeds at almost any season. It has been crossed with the 
Virginia deer. 



24 KAISING DEER IN THE UNITED STATES. 

SMALL DEER. 

The exotic species thus far mentioned are as large as our common 
deer, or larger. On our American farms and ranches, especially in 
the South, there is a distinct demand for a food animal of smaller 
size than the sheep for family use. A number of species of small 
Asiatic deer might admirably fill this want. Among them are 
several of the muntjacs {Cervulus) and the Chinese water deer 
(Hydrela/pKus inermis) . 

The Indian muntjac (Cervulus rnuntjac) is probably the best- 
known species of this genus. It is a beautiful little deer, with small 
horns, and stands 20 to 22 inches high. The animals live in thickets 
and tall grass, and are said to be solitary except when pairing. 
They are timid and seldom seen except when running away from 
beaters. When cornered they defend themselves with the long 
canine teeth and not with horns and hoofs like other deer. The 
period of gestation is six months, and two young are produced 
at a time. The animals feed like sheep on almost any herbage. 
They thrive in English parks and would probably flourish in our 
Southern States. The flesh is said to be excellent. 

The Chinese water deer is less solitary in its habits, but in size and 
some other characteristics it is like the muntjacs. It is the most 
prolific of all the deer family, the female producing three or four 
young at a time. It is suited to marshy lands. 

If any one of the various small species of deer or even antelope 
could be raised in the Southern States, it would furnish the farmers 
a much needed form of meat, which could be provided fresh every 
day or two as needed. Aside from fowls most of our domestic ani- 
mals are too large for immediate consumption by the ordinary 
farmer's family. The successful introduction and breeding of a 
small mammal, in size intermediate between a hare and a sheep, 
would be of sufficient economic importance to warrant the expendi- 
ture of considerable sums of money in experiments. But this state- 
ment is true also of the domestication of any other deer. 

OBJECTIONS TO THE INTRODUCTION OF FOREIGN ANIMALS. 

In suggesting the acclimatization of foreign game animals, the 
Biological Survey does not. advocate their indiscriminate introduction 
into the United States nor the immediate release of any of them to 
resume their wild life. The history of the introduction of beneficial 
animals into new localities should teach caution in such experiments. 
Even species fully domesticated have become injurious when neg- 
lected and allowed to run wild. Devastations of crops by horses, 
cattle, pigs, and goats, introduced into new countries for domestic 
use and afterwards abandoned, have been known in many parts of 



HABITS OF THE WAPITI. 25 

the world. The destruction of native birds and mammals by clogs 
and cats that have gone wild furnishes an equally valid argument for 
caution. Probably less danger attends the acclimatization and release 
of the class of animals under discussion than any other; and yet it 
is known that deer and antelope under certain circumstances have 
increased so enormously as to destroy important crops. Ordinarily 
should they prove injurious in the United States, the removal of 
protection would be followed by their speedy extermination as game. 

THE WAPITI, OR ROCKY MOUNTAIN ELK. 

HABITS. 

In this bulletin the life history and habits of the Rocky Mountain 
elk are discussed only so far as they bear on the care and management 
of the animals in captivity or in game preserves. 

On account of its size, the elk holds a place among American deer 
much like that occupied by the red deer among European Cervidee. 
Although a larger species, its general resemblance to the red deer 
caused early immigrants to apply that name to it. In New England, 
where there were no elk, the common Virginia deer was called the 
red deer. This confusion of names probably led to the adoption of 
the name elk for the wapiti because of its size. In view of its re- 
semblance to the red deer so common in parks in the Old World, it 
seems strange that attempts to domesticate the wapiti in America 
were so long delayed. 

The elk is both a browsing and a grazing animal. While it eats 
grass freely and can subsist upon it alone, it thrives best where there 
are also trees and underbrush. In its former range, when the sur- 
roundings permitted, it retreated into mountains and woodlands in 
summer, where it fed upon buds, twigs, leaves, and woodland grasses, 
while in winter it grazed chiefly in open prairies or glades, unless 
driven to timber by deep snows. The Wyoming herds summer chiefly 
in the high mountain pastures of the Yellowstone Park, and when 
these become covered with deep snow the animals retreat to the val- 
leys southward and eastward of the park. They formerly ranged 
far out on the plains in winter, but intense summer grazing by cattle 
and sheep now leaves the winter pasturage too scant for them. 

The American elk is extremely polygamous. The horns of adult 
bulls usually drop off in March or April, and new ones attain their 
full size within ninety days. The velvet adheres until about August, 
when it is gradually shed. The animals hasten the shedding by 
thrashing their horns against small trees and bushes. This is often 
referred to by hunters as " shaking," from the fact that the motion 
of the trees may be seen at great distances. The bulls usually lead 
solitary lives while the horns are growing, but early in September, 
63030°— Bull. 36—10 4 



26 RAISING DEER IN THE UNITED STATES. 

when the antlers are fully matured, the rutting season begins, and the 
bulls seek the herds of cows. Fights for supremacy then take place, 
and the victor takes charge of as many cows as he can round up and 
control. 

In spring the cows remain in small herds until nearly time for 
the calves to be born. Then each seeks a secluded place, where she 
remains until the calf is strong enough to follow. In late summer 
the cows and calves begin to collect into small herds and are soon 
joined by the bulls. The period of gestation in the elk is from 249 
to 262 days (average about 8-J months). The calves are born in May 
or June and, like the young of the common deer, are spotted, but the 
spots are not so numerous nor so clearly defined, and they disappear 
in September with the first shedding of the hair. The female elk 
does not have young until three or four years old, and usually pro- 
duces but one calf at a time. The calf follows the cow for a full year 
and sometimes even longer. 

ELK VENISON. 

The flesh of the elk is superior in flavor to most venison. The bulls 
are in best condition about the time the velvet is shed. By the time 
the rut is over, in October, the flesh is in the poorest condition. As 
the hunting season is usually in October and November and only 
males are killed, sportsmen often obtain the venison in poor condition, 
and, as a result, many persons have found fault with the flavor of elk 
meat. It is not best when freshly killed, but after hanging four or 
five days it becomes palatable and nutritious. Of course fat elk are 
better than lean, and it is said that the venison from castrated bulls 
is superior to that from others. 

PRESERVATION OF THE ELK. 

The preservation of the Rocky Mountain elk is of even greater 
importance than that of the American buffalo. While the destruc- 
tion has not gone so far as in the case of the buffalo, absence of the 
elk from nineteen-twentieths of its former range is to be even more 
regretted. The buffalo was especially adapted to the prairies and 
the plains, and economically its place is better filled by the domestic 
cattle that now graze there. On the other hand, the elk is equally 
well, if not better, suited to rough, wooded areas not well adapted to 
cattle. Its preservation, therefore, may economically utilize such 
land, and the animals may become a valuable resource to the State as 
well as to the private owner. 

The value of game to the State is seldom so fully appreciated that 
it is properly conserved and made to yield permanent returns. Maine 
probably secures the best value from its big game. Deer and moose 



WILD ELK IN THE EASTEKN UNITED STATES. 27 

in that State now pay a large part of the cost of game protection; 
the addition of a small resident license fee for hunting would make 
the actual revenue exceed considerably the cost of fish and game 
preservation. In addition, licensed guides earn about $360,000 a 
year, while hotel keepers, railroads, express companies, and others 
derive greatly increased incomes from the sportsmen and tourists 
who are attracted to the State by its excellent hunting and fishing. 
Any State that has big game may profit by its preservation, and 
owners of private big game preserves should find them equally re- 
munerative. 

Its polygamous habit is a favorable factor in preserving the elk. 
The extermination of the buffalo was hastened by the fact that 
hunters, both white and native, preferred to kill the cows. Their 
flesh was superior to that of the bulls, while the robes they produced 
were of finer quality. In the course of time polyandry became so 
fixed among buffaloes that reproduction fell much below the nor- 
mal rate. In the case of the elk, polygamy is the rule; and the de- 
struction for trophies of males only, as well as the laws of States 
which forbid the killing of does, serves to perpetuate the species. 
The breeding of the animals is thus kept at a maximum rate. 

The. fact that elk congregate in large herds in winter has been 
unfavorable to their preservation. Pasture in their winter ranges is 
often insufficient for the demand, and the weaker animals perish. In 
recent years, because of the encroachments of cattle and other stock 
upon the range, elk winter higher up in the mountains, where the 
snowfall is great. Poachers wearing snowshoes often approach 
and destroy an entire herd. Under adequate protection and with a 
proper supply of winter forage the gregarious habits of the elk would 
give increased security to the herds, but conditions hitherto have not 
brought about such results. On the contrary, wherever elk have 
been abundant much unlawful slaughter of the animals has taken 
place. Not only have nonresident hunters engaged in the business 
of killing them for heads, hides, and tusks, but residents of the game 
country have sometimes engaged in the same nefarious practice. 

WILD ELK IN THE EASTERN UNITED STATES. 

Probably the last wild elk of the original stock east of the Mis- 
sissippi was killed in November, 1867, in Elk County, Pa., though 
possibly a few remained a little longer in the mountains of West 
Virginia. A few wealthy men have stocked private preserves with 
elk from the Rocky Mountains, and the experiment of acclimatizing 
them in the East has proved uniformly successful. A number of 
preserves in New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, 
Pennsylvania, and North Carolina have been noted for fine herds of 
these animals, the best known, perhaps, being those of Austin Corbin 



28 RAISING DEER IN THE UNITED STATES. 

and William C. Whitney, both deceased. The Corbin preserve is on 
Croyden Mountain, near Newport, N. H., and the Whitney pre- 
serve was on October Mountain, near Lenox, Mass. At Mount Po- 
cono, Pennsylvania, Carl Tielenius has a considerable herd of elk, 
kept on lands over which the wild elk ranged in the early part of 
the last century. 

The New York Forest, Fish, and Game Commission have made in 
the Adirondacks the first systematic efforts in the East to restore 
elk to their former ranges. In June, 1901, the late William C. 
Whitney presented 22 head of elk — 5 bulls and IT cows — from his 
Massachusetts herd. This was followed in 1902 and 1903 by two gifts 
of larger herds from the same source and in 1906 by a gift of a herd 
of 26 from Mr. Corbin's Blue Mountain Forest Park, in New Hamp- 
shire. The elk were liberated in small bands at various places, 
mostly on state lands, and their increase has been satisfactory. It 
was estimated that on December 31, 1906, the total number at large 
in the Adirondacks was about 350 head. a The elk, under proper pro- 
tection, may be expected to become abundant again in the North 
Woods. The example of New York might well be followed by all 
States that have wild lands suitable for the elk. Pennsylvania has 
ideal places for the animals in her game preserves recently estab- 
lished, and all the States traversed by the Allegheny Mountain ranges 
have abundant wild lands for the introduction of the species. The 
cost of stocking with the animals would be slight compared with their 
ultimate value to the State. In New Hampshire there is reason to 
suppose that the beginning of a wild herd exists in animals that 
have escaped from the Corbin preserve. Forty-eight elk in one 
herd are reported to have been recently seen running at large in the 
forests. 6 

EXPERIENCE IN RAISING ELK. 

Although the American wapiti is less prolific than the common 
deer and some other species that have been bred in parks, it increases 
quite as fast as the red deer and is more hardy and easily managed. 
It has been successfully acclimatized in many parts of the world, 
and in England and on the Continent it has been crossed with both 
the Altai wapiti and the red deer. The hybrids in both cases were 
superior to the native stock in size and stamina. 

The elk has been successfully bred in confinement in many parts 
of the United States, and in some instances has been domesticated. 
Audubon and Bachman say of it: 

This species can be easily domesticated, as we have observed it in menageries 
and in parks both of Europe and America. The males, like those of the Vir- 

° Field and Stream, XII, 598, November, 1907. 
b Recreation, XXVII, 129, March, 1908. 



EXPERIENCE IN RAISING ELK. 29 

ginia deer, as they advance in age, by their pugnacious habits are apt to become 
troublesome and dangerous. The elk lives to a great age, one having been kept 
in the possession of the elder Peale, of Philadelphia, for thirteen years; we 
observed one in the park of a nobleman in Austria that had been received from 
America twenty-five years before. 

Professor Baird was of the opinion that the elk could easily be 
domesticated, and that, next to the caribou and the moose, it is the 
" one to which we are most entitled to look for an increase of our 
stock of domestic animals. The great size of the horns of the male, 
and his fierceness and uncontrollability during the rutting season, 
are certainly obstacles in the way of reducing the elk to the rank of 
a servant to man; nevertheless they are not unsurmountable, after 
all." He suggested that, as in the case of the buck of the common 
deer, castration would effectually subdue the animal. He suggested 
further that if the social instinct is necessary to the complete 
domestication of an animal, no deer possesses it in a higher degree 
than the elk, which is often found in immense herds. 6 

One of the earliest successful attempts to domesticate the round- 
horned elk was made by Col. John Mercer, of Cedar Park, West 
River, Md. Colonel Mercer obtained his stock from St. Louis about 
seventy-five or eighty years ago. The animals were transported to 
Wheeling by water and thence to West River by way of Cumber- 
land on foot. A few other breeders obtained stock from Colonel 
Mercer, among them Col. Joseph Tuley, of Millwood, Clarke 
County, Va. 

Lorenzo Stratton, of Little Valley, Cattaraugus County, N. Y., 
began experiments with this species about sixty years ago. In a 
letter addressed to D. J. Browne, and dated January 12, 1859, he 
says: 

The American elk, with all its claims to attention, is fast disappearing from 
the earth, with scarcely an effort for its preservation or domestication. By 
domestication I do not mean simply taming, but a course of intelligent breed- 
ing and protection. A series of experiments with this animal * * * has 
furnished me with sufficient evidence to say confidently that this business may 
be made of great importance to the country. * * * I have now a herd so 
gentle that a visitor at my farm would hardly imagine that their ancestors 
only three generations back were wild animals. * * * 

The facility for extending this business may easily be conceived. New York 
alone might support 100,000 elks ou land where our domestic cattle could not 
subsist ; furnishing an amount of venison almost incredible ; while the adjoin- 
ing State of Pennsylvania, to say nothing of others, might sustain a still larger 
number without encroaching upon an acre of land now used for stock rearing, 
or any other purpose connected with agriculture. 

a The Quadrupeds of North America, II, 92, 1851. 

6 Report TJ. S. Com. Patents (Agriculture) for 1851, p. 118, 1852. 

c Report U. S. Com. of Patents (Agriculture) for 1858, p. 237, 1859. 



SO RAISING DEER IN THE UNITED STATES. 

At a meeting of the American Institute in New York January 6, 
1862, Mr. Stratton gave a detailed account of his experience in 
domesticating the elk, in which he said, in part : 

About eight years ago I had an opportunity to purchase two elks. I did so as 
a matter of curiosity and because I wished to see a few specimens of this for- 
ester preserved, as my place is situated in the region where they used to roam 
in countless numbers. They did well and bred. I fenced off a few acres for 
them, and found after a while that I could certainly raise venison cheaper thau 
my neighbors could raise beef. I devoted a large plat of stony, bushy land, 
unfit for any other purpose, to them. Since then I have succeeded in breeding 
37 elk. I have had no accident of any kind amongst them, and they have fatted 
and bred regularly and have become quite domesticated. The does have been 
gentle and act like domestic cattle. The bucks have been also gentle until they 
were about 4 years old, when they have been difficult to manage in September 
and October, like a bull or stud-horse. In such cases I generally made venison 
of them. Excepting these instances, however, the animals are quite docile. 
The first fawn that I raised was very shy. He was in a lot of about 15 acres, 
and when I went to him he would flee from me, so that I could hardly get a 
sight at him. The next fawns raised were not so frightened when they saw 
me, and now when I go into the field the young fawns are like so many calves. 
My lot is fenced with common rails, 6 or 7 feet high, and there is no difficulty 
in keeping the animals within bounds. Frequently, when the fence may get 
down, they go out into a neighboring piece of woods, but as soon as anything 
startles them they run for their own field again, and feel safe only when they 
arrive there. They are not inclined to stray off. This lot in which they are 
confined they consider as their home, and chase off any dogs that may come 
upon it. In four generations, by kind treatment, I have, as I contend, not 
merely succeeded in taming them, but in domesticating them. They are as 
gentle as sheep that run wild. * * * 

* * * The great profit in raising them, however, is for their meat. They 
live and fatten on useless land. Where the feeding ground is brush they will 
destroy it; but the grass will come up more profusely on this account in the 
summer ; and it has the result of giving them better feed in the summer though 
not so good in the winter. I paid $400 for the first pair I bought ; I have bought 
2 does since then, from which, with the first pair, I have raised my whole stock ; 
I have been at various unnecessary expenses, from the fact that I did not know 
how to manage them ; I can now raise elk cheaper than I can sheep ; I have a 
3-year-old buck, weighing 4S0 pounds, which has cost me less than any 3-year-old 
sheep I have got. I have been anxious to introduce them as common stock and 
have sold them for $100 a pair. A great many are afraid to buy them, for fear 
they will get away and go wild again. They see me go into the field and all 
the flock come about me, and each one tries to get his nose into my pocket ; but 
they say, " I don't believe I could do that." They think there is some Rarey secret 
about it. When I go into the lot, I generally carry a little handful of salt, or 
grain, or something which they like, which makes them come about me. * * * 

I think there is no better meat than that of the elk; it is richer and more 
juicy than the meat of the deer ; I killed a 2-year-old doe this year which had 
had no fawn ; she was very fat ; I took 29 pounds of tallow from her, and she 
weighed 282 pounds dressed, the skin weighing 28 pounds. 

At the same meeting Mr. Trimble stated that several years pre- 
viously, while traveling over the prairie in Illinois, he had seen at a 



EXPERIENCE IN RAISING ELK. 31 

house where he stopped a full-grown elk perfectly domesticated. 
There were no fences about and it never attempted to run away." 

The final outcome of the Stratton experiment at Little Valley was 
recorded in a communication to Forest and Stream by Mr. E. L„ 
Stratton, of Grand View, Tenn., a brother of Lorenzo Stratton. He 
stated that so far as the experiment was carried it was a complete 
success. " Had there been a moderate amount of capital invested, 
with a larger territory of cheap mountain land added, and with 
close attention to the business, it would have been a profitable invest- 
ment and doubtless would have shown handsome dividends. But 
when we decided to move South, the elk business had to be aban- 
doned. Most of the stock on hand was bought by some foreigners 
and shipped by rail to New York, thence some to Italy and the 
rest to Germany, and three or four were slaughtered at home." & 

In 1887 T. D. Kellogg, of Whitestone, Long Island, contributed to 
the New York Herald an interesting account of his observations on 
domesticating the wapiti, made when a pioneer in northwestern Iowa 
in the fifties. Mr. Kellogg said that at that time elk roamed over 
all the plains of that part of Iowa, but already in diminishing num- 
bers. In the spring when a settler had killed a doe elk he would occa- 
sionally take home a suckling fawn in his arms and bring it up by 
hand. Two settlers whom he knew well had each an elk thus domes- 
ticated, and several similar instances came to his knowledge. These 
settlers had no inclosure except a small garden patch, from which 
stock was excluded by a rude fence. 

The tame elk, let loose upon the open prairie, were at full liberty, 
and although born in a wild state they never joined a passing herd 
nor roamed far from home. They gave no trouble by getting into 
the garden or injuring the fence. They were less timid than sheep, 
although not so familiar as dogs. " Probably no animal in existence," 
says Mr. Kellogg, " is naturally fitted to take so kindly to domestica- 
tion as this noble creature, so rapidly disappearing from the face of 
the earth." c 

Judge John D. Caton, of Illinois, who contributed so much to our 
knowledge of the deer family and of their susceptibility to domestica- 
tion, seems to have been unfortunate in having inclosures poorly 
adapted to deer. He believed that his pastures contained some kind 
of vegetable food that was harmful to most of the species, but his 
elk were always healthy. Writing in 1880, Judge Caton said : 

My elk continue to do well and are so prolific that I have had repeatedly to 
reduce their numbers and would be glad now to dispose of at least 30. I 

Trans. Ana. Institute for 1S61-62, pp. 220-223, 1862. 

6 Forest and Stream, XLVIII, 445, June 5, 1S97. 

c The American Field, XXVIII, 126, August 6, 1887. 



32 RAISING DEER IN THE UNITED STATES. 

have on an average about one old buck a year killed in battle and sometimes 
another by some casualty, but all appear healthy. Mine grow very large and 
of all the Cervidse they seem best adapted to domestication. 

With few exceptions former attempts to rear elk were made by 
men who were wealthy and actuated only by a desire to possess or 
to preserve the animals. Care of them was left to servants. The 
bucks remained uncastrated until they became old and unmanageable, 
when the serious problem of caring for them soon outweighed the 
novelty of their possession, and the experiments were abandoned. 
This will account for the failure of many of the herds that were 
founded a half century or more ago. 

But these breeders of the elk have not been without successors, and 
at present there are small herds of elk under private ownership in 
many places in the United States. The Biological Survey has re- 
cently opened communication with owners of herds of elk and deer, 
for the purpose of learning their experience in rearing the animals 
and obtaining their opinions as to the feasibility of making the busi- 
ness profitable. Extracts from recent correspondence referring to 
the wapiti, or elk, follow: 

Joshua Hill, of Pontiac, Mich., wrote, October 12, 1907, that he has 
elk and bison in his preserve of 300 acres. He finds the sale of elk 
meat slow, but thinks that, if properly pushed, the business of grow- 
ing it would pay well. In his opinion the elk would be more profitable 
than deer, since the animals are larger and the venison better. He has 
heard of elk meat bringing 50 cents to $1 per pound. 

Isaac A. Bonine, of Mies, Mich., wrote, under date of October 14, 
1907, stating that he had been breeding both the elk and deer for 
about thirty-five years. He said : " We find that deer are not so hardy 
as elk and require more care. Elk require less care than the domestic 
animals, while deer are even more delicate. Deer should have a greater 
variety of food than elk. Elk winter well on hay and corn fodder 
with a little grain, and they live and thrive during summer months 
on blue grass. Deer will live on the foods mentioned here for elk, but 
they should have vegetables also. They require an open shed or 
shelter of some sort during winter; an elk requires none. The grow- 
ing of both elk and deer for park purposes may be made profitable." 

J. W. Gilbert, of Friend, Nebr., states (March 17, 1908) that he has 
been growing deer and elk for seventeen years. The deer have not 
always done well, but he now has a healthy herd of about 30 head. 
The elk have increased and done well all the time. He has never had 
a barren cow elk. Mr. Gilbert's range of 75 acres is on the open 
prairie, and contains buffalo, deer, and elk. 

F. J. Wilson, of Lewisburg, Ohio, began raising elk and deer a few 
years ago, with three head of each at first. He has not succeeded so 

°Ameriean Naturalist, XIV, 396, April, 1880. 



ELK IN THE. OZARK MOUNTAINS. 33 

well with deer as with the elk. Deer require a higher fence and more 
care. The elk do well on hay, corn fodder, and other rough feed ; if 
they escape from an inclosure they can be driven back like cattle. 
Mr. Wilson paid $165 for 2 adult elk and a fawn. He has sold $300 
worth of stock, and, in 1908, had a herd of 12 head, worth $1,000. 

The experience of Carl Tielenius with his herd at Mount Pocono, 
Pa., is less satisfactory. He began about the year 1890 with 26 head 
of 2-year-old elk, 22 of which were cows. The first year they pro- 
duced 23 calves, and in the following four years 22, 18, 16, and 12, 
respectively. In later years with about 80 cows the number of calves 
has ranged from 5 to 10 per year. The herd is healthy, but reproduc- 
tion is deficient in spite of the infusion of new blood by the introduc- 
tion of bulls, from the Whitney herd. It is possible that, as Judge 
Caton suspected to be the trouble in his herd, the bulls at Mount 
Pocono exhaust themselves by much fighting before the rut begins. 

ELK IN THE OZARK MOUNTAINS. 

Col. W. C. Wetmore, of St. Louis, writes under date of April 20, 
1908, that the St. Louis Park and Agricultural Company, of which he 
is a member, owns several thousand acres of land in Taney County, 
Mo. The land is in the Ozark Mountains and the ground rough and 
hilly, though well watered. A little of the upland and some of the 
valleys are tillable, and corn and oats are grown in the former and 
corn and alfalfa in the latter — enough to feed the game when snow 
prevents their finding their ordinary food. The preserve is sur- 
rounded with an 8- foot wire fence, and in it are now about 400 elk 
and 1,000 deer. 

Colonel Wetmore writes further : 

They are hearty and healthy and do well in every way and at all times are 
fat and marketable. I am thoroughly convinced that the raising of both elk 
and deer can be made very profitable where the ground, water, and other condi- 
tions are favorable. Deer increase very rapidly, as a doe usually drops twins 
after she is three years old. Elk do not increase so rapidly, cow elk dropping a 
calf every other year, but they are hardy, and with an experience of over 
twenty years I have not known one to die of natural causes. * * * I am a 
lover of all wild game, particularly deer and elk, and I hope you will be suc- 
cessful in interesting people in propagating them. Give them plenty of room to 
run in and they will do well. 

George W. Russ, of Eureka Springs, Ark., has a herd of 93 elk 
(1909). They have ample range in the Ozarks on rough land covered 
with hardwood forest and abundant underbrush., He reports that the 
animals improve the forest by clearing out part of the thicket. 
Fully 90 per cent of the females produce healthy young, and Mr. 
Russ thinks he could make the business of growing elk for market 
profitable if the law would permit him to kill and export the meat. 



34 RAISING DEER IF THE UNITED STATES. 

He has an offer of 40 cents a pound for the dressed carcasses in St. 
Louis. If, as he claims, he can produce elk meat cheaper than beef, 
pork, or mutton, this should be a remunerative price. He thinks that 
large areas in the Alleghenies and Ozarks not now utilized could be 
economically adapted to produce venison for sale, and he regards 
the American elk as especially suited for forest grazing. 

Mr. Russ, in a letter dated Eureka Springs, Ark., March 7, 1908, 
sent the Department of Agriculture, through H. N. Vinall, Bureau 
of Plant Industry, the following answers to the several questions 
propounded : 

Question 1. How many acres per elk of forest land is needed for best results? 

Answer. Much depends upon the character of the forest land. In this section 
of the Ozark Mountains an average of 5 acres to the head. In other sections a 
lai-ger area will be necessary. The larger the area the better the results. One 
hundred elk will fare better in a 500-acre inclosure than one elk confined on 5 
acres. 

Question 2. Would it be possible for individuals to raise elk under grazing 
permits in large tracts like the national forests without fencing, by some method 
of feeding in a certain place or by herding? 

Answer. We think it possible to raise elk by individuals having permits in 
the national forests, by a system of feeding in certain places, thereby locating 
these animals on the range best fitted for them, and by loose herding by well- 
trained men familiar with their habits. But there are so many contingencies 
to be reckoned with on an open range that in our opinion it would be far 
preferable to fence. 

Question 3. What is the cost per mile in forest land of an elk fence? 

Answer. Again, much depends on distance from railroad, cost of labor, etc. ; 
but ordinarily where posts and stays cost nothing but the making of them a 
good elk fence can be built for about $200 per mile. 

Question 4. Will the elk do any considerable damage to a forest in restricting 
the growth of young trees of valuable species? 

Answer. Elk will feed on buds and leaves 8 feet above the ground, and any 
growth up to or under this is liable to be eliminated, depending upon the amount 
of such food. Unless the range is very much restricted they will not eat the 
bark from trees, neither will they resort to any species of evergreen. (PL IV.) 

Question 5. What has been the per cent of increase in your herd under domes- 
tication? 

Answer. The increase in elk under domestication is equal to that of cattle. 

Question 6. What is the average weight of an adult male? Of a female? 
Answer. Male, 700 to 1,000 pounds ; female, 600 to 800 pounds. 

Question 7. Will they not give a greater per cent of dressed meat than 
cattle? 

Answer. Yes; but owing to the game laws our experience has been limited 
to a few animals. The per cent of dressed meat is much more. 



Bui. 36, Biological Survey, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 



Plate IV. 




36, Biological Survey, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 



Plate V. 




ELK IN THE OZARK MOUNTAINS. 35 

Question 8. Is there at this time, or would there be in case the laws were 
revised, any general demand for elk meat? At what price? 

Answer. In answer to this question, we can be guided only by the very 
limited demand, owing to the law prohibiting the sale of elk meat. We do, 
however, receive orders from parties not familiar with the law, and letters 
from many asking us if we are permitted to sell. From the fact that as 
high as $1.50 per pound has been paid for this meat in New York City and 
Canada, and that the best hotels and restaurants pronounce it the finest of all 
the meats of mammals, we are of the opinion that if the laws were such that 
domesticated elk meat could be furnished it would be many years before the 
supply would make the price reasonable compared with other meats. 

Question 9. What price per pound would you consider necessary to make the 
production of elk meat profitable? 

Answer. Elk meat can be produced in many sections of this country for 
less cost per pound than beef, mutton, or pork. 

Question 10. What laws, state or national, at present interfere with the 
production and sale of elk meat? What are your recommendations for revising 
these laws? 

Answer. The remedy to the state and national laws is very simple, and at 
the same time just and equitable. By simply adding or inserting the word 
" wild " before the name of the animal protected. To guard against abuses, 
a certificate from the owner of domesticated animals should follow them, and 
proper penalties should be imposed for any violation of the laws. 

Question 11. Would the elk be adapted for browsing in the Appalachian 
forests from Pennsylvania south to Georgia? 

Answer. Yes ; I am quite familiar with the Appalachian range, and consider 
it ideal. 

Question 12. Are they as useful as goats in clearing out underbrush? Is it 
best to use both goats and elk? 

Answer. They are more useful, as they will browse as low as goats and twice 
as high. I would earnestly recommend the use of both goats and elk for clearing 
up brushy land and fitting it for tame grasses. Elk and goats get along well in 
the same inclosure. 

Question 13. What area will they clear up per year in your section? Keep 
cleared? 

Answer. So much depends on the amount of underbrush as to the average 
amount elk and goats will keep cleared. The conditions in a mountainous 
country are much more diversified than in a level one, the growth of underbrush 
and timber often changing radically in a fourth of a mile. The average condi- 
tions in this range of mountains can only be estimated approximately. Our ex- 
perience has taught us that to get the best results, after stocking with elk and 
goats, it is best to wait one year before seeding, then continue with elk and 
goats two years more ; when, if properly seeded and pastured, an open wood- 
land pasture of tame grasses will be obtained (Plate V). To accomplish this, 
our estimate would be an average of one elk and two goats to 5 acres. When 
the underbrush and weeds have been eliminated by elk and goats, they will be 
very slow in coming in again. The life has been destroyed by the continued 
browsing on bud and leaf, and not only is the stem dead but the root also. The 



36 RAISING DEER IN THE UNITED STATES. 

perennial weeds have been treated the same way. Those coming from seed 
must come from outside the fence, and will find the tame grasses in possession. 
Elk and goats fed on the falling leaves in the fall, thus lessening the covering 
of grasses. Tame grasses will not thrive under a thick coating of dead leaves. 

Question 14. Is the forest open enough after their work to permit the growth 
of grass? 

Answer. Elk and goats do not open up dense forests, except undergrowth. 
It is necessary to have considerable light and sun for the growing of tame 
grasses. 

Question 15. After the forest land has been cleared and seeded to tame grass, 
could sheep be grazed in the same lot as the elk? 

Answer. In reply to this question, we answer from long experience that 
cattle, sheep, and goats can be grazed in the same lots with elk, providing, 
however, that the lots or inclosures are not small — the larger the area the bet- 
ter; and we know of no more appropriate place to call attention to the great 
benefit of a few elk in the same pasture with sheep or goats. An elk is the 
natural enemy of dogs and wolves. We suffered great losses to our flocks until 
we learned this fact ; since then we have had no loss from that cause. A few 
elk in a thousand-acre pasture will absolutely protect the flocks therein. Our 
own dogs are so well aware of the danger in our elk park that they can not 
be induced to enter it. 

In your note you invite us to suggest any other points not covered by your 
questions. We think of nothing but feed and shelter. Nature has provided the 
elk with a winter coat of hair, which is in itself ample protection from any 
weather conditions, and which makes artificial protection unnecessary. All that 
is needed is feed, and on account of their browsing on that which is already in 
our hills and low mountains but little provision is needed. Like cattle, they are 
fond of grain and can be fattened on it, but may be kept in good condition 
during the winter on very little roughness. To be more explicit, one-half the 
ration per pound required for cattle will do for elk. We have opinions about 
caring for and domesticating the wild elk, saving to the nation what yet remains, 
and using them as a nucleus for general domestication and distribution. These 
views we will gladly furnish if desired. 

MANAGEMENT OF ELK IN INCLOSURES. 

The experience of Mr. Stratton at Little Valley, N. Y., recounted 
in the preceding pages, gives an excellent foundation for practice in 
developing a true domesticity in the wapiti ; but for economic reasons 
it may not always be possible for the raiser of the elk to adopt the 
same methods. He may wish to grow the animals for venison only 
and on large preserves where the calves can not be tamed when young. 
But when the elk is grown for stocking parks and private preserves, 
the tamer the herd the easier will it be to handle and ship the stock. 

RANGE. 

The natural food supply is an important consideration in choosing 
a range for the elk. While elk have done well in blue-grass pas- 
ture and on the prairie grasses alone, they do far better on preserves 



Bui. 36, Biological Survey, U. S. Dept. ot Agriculture. 



Plate V!. 




MANAGEMENT OF ELK. 37 

which have a variety of food — grasses, bushes, and trees. Rough 
lands well watered by streams and having a considerable proportion 
of forested area are best adapted to their wants. On an average such 
lands will support about the same number of elk as of cattle on the 
same area without impairing the range. There should be thickets 
enough to furnish winter browse for the animals. A supply of winter 
forage of other kinds will prevent the too rapid destruction of shrub- 
bery in thickets. 

FOOD. 

Except in times of snow, elk will keep in excellent condition on 
ordinary grass pasture, but a system of management which regularly 
furnishes other food to the animals will be found better. For winter, 
hay and corn fodder furnish excellent forage; but alfalfa hay has 
proved to be the most satisfactory dry food that can be given to 
either elk or deer. A little oats or corn, whole or chopped, may be 
fed each day. Elk are fond of corn, and feeding corn and salt 
affords the best opportunities for winning confidence of the animals 
and taming them. Salt should be furnished liberally to all deer kept 
in inclosures. Running water, although not essential, is of great im- 
portance in maintaining elk in good condition. (Plate VI shows 
a small herd of elk at feeding place in winter.) 

FENCE. 

Elk are not nervous like the common deer and seldom jump an 
ordinary fence. A fence 5 feet in height is usually sufficient to con- 
fine elk, and Henry Binning, of Cora, Wyo., thinks a 4-foot woven- 
wire fence is ample. When they escape from an inclosure in which 
they have been fed they usually return of their own accord. Some 
herds may be driven like ordinary cattle. A small inclosure for a 
vicious bull elk should have a strong fence, 7 or 8 feet high. Mr. Russ 
tells us that where lumber for posts is cheap a good elk fence can be 
built for $200 a mile, but the actual cost will, of course, vary greatly, 
according to style, cost of labor, nearness to market, and other 
circumstances. 

COST OF STOCK. 

The cost of stocking an elk preserve is not great. Young elk in 
perfect condition may be bought for $100 per head or less. A few 
years ago Mr. Wilson, of Lewisburg, Ohio, paid $165 for 3 head. 
A Michigan breeder recently offered a dozen head, all fine specimens, 
but age and sex not given, for $500. This is, of course, a low price, 
not more than cattle would bring, and less than the venison would be 
worth if they could be sold in that form. The price of such stock is 
determined by the law of supply and demand, and as long as the 



38 RAISING DEER IN THE UNITED STATES. 

present restrictions on the sale of deer and elk are maintained, low 
prices are likely to prevail. Live elk sold at forced sale have been 
known to net the owners less than $25 a head, but conditions would 
soon change if the laws concerning the sale and shipment of venison 
were generally made favorable for producing it in preserves. The 
demand for breeding stock would grow and increase the cost of start- 
ing, as well as the returns from the business. 

VICIOUSNESS OF THE MALE ELK. 

Notwithstanding the viciousness of the male elk in the rutting 
season, he is ordinarily docile, probably more so than the buck of the 
common deer. Male elk have frequently been trained to harness 
and driven in public. Lorenzo Stratton trained a pair to harness 
and began exhibiting them at the Cattaraugus County (N. Y.) fair in 
1853. They were a feature of the fair for several years, until he sold 
them in Europe. Exhibitions of trotting elks were common at county 
fairs in the Middle West a few years ago. W. H. Barnes, of Sioux 
City, Iowa, trained a pair and drove them harnessed to a light vehicle. 
He afterwards taught one of them to dive from a platform 30 feet 
high into a pool of water, and later he exhibited the animal in this 
act to admiring crowds in Europe. 

The intractability of the male elk is not exceptional among deer 
kept in confinement, but his great size, his long, sharp-pointed antlers, 
and his thick skin, that renders him insensible to pain, make him 
much more formidable than the common deer. Several tragedies 
connected with attempts to domesticate the elk are matters of history. 
One recorded by Judge Caton occurred in his park. 6 Another took 
place at Bull City, Osborne County, Kans., October 12, 1879, in which 
Gen. H. C. Bull was instantly killed, two other men mortally 
wounded, and a fourth seriously injured by the attacks of an infuri- 
ated elk that had previously been regarded as tame and docile. 

Deer and elk that are wild and unconfined will, under nearly all 
circumstances, run from man. When wounded they have been known 
to attack hunters; but it is unlikely that an uninjured wild bull elk 
would attack a human being even during the rut. The tame or par- 
tially tame animals that have become familiar with man are the ones 
to be feared. However, not all individuals become ill-tempered or 
vicious. 

It should be borne in mind that all deer when confined in small in- 
closures and partly domesticated are likely to become dangerous 

a Since the above paragraph was written Farmers' Bulletin No. 330, Deer 
Farming in the United States, has been issued, and an unusual demand for deer 
and elk for breeding purposes has developed. Consequently prices are consider- 
ably higher. 

6 The Antelope and Deer of America, p. 285, 1877. 



THE ELK AN ENEMY OP WOLVES AND DOGS. 39 

whether they have antlers or not. They can strike a vicious blow 
with the front feet; and a strong man, taken unawares, may easily 
be disabled or even killed by a doe of the common deer. To over- 
come the tendency to bad temper in deer would require many genera- 
tions of breeding under domestication. It can not be quickly eradi- 
cated by petting the animals ; on the contrary, it is usually increased 
by overf amiliarity. Children and strangers should be excluded from 
parks and paddocks that contain deer known to be vicious. Special 
precautions should be taken during the rut and when does have very 
young fawns. Persons with whom the animals are familiar should 
be constantly on the alert against surprise. In the rutting season no 
adult male deer or elk, however mild he may be at other times, should 
be trusted. 

The remedy for viciousness in the male deer is castration. This 
makes the animal docile. It is unsafe to keep an uncastrated male 
elk over 4 years old, except in a strongly fenced inclosure. If the 
operation is performed when the horns are fully developed, they will 
be shed at the usual time and a new pair will take their place, but 
will not fully mature nor lose the velvet. 

Another effect of castration is improvement in the quality of the 
meat, just as in the production of beef, pork, and mutton. Venison 
grown in preserves under a system in which all the male animals 
intended for slaughter are castrated should be uniformly of the 
highest quality, far superior to that obtained in the wild state during 
the usual open season for hunting, which comes during the rut or soon 
after. This is of great importance in fixing the final status of veni- 
son grown in private preserves. 

THE ELK AS AN ENEMY OF WOLVES AND DOGS. 

The statement by Mr. Russ in his report on raising the elk in the 
Ozarks, to the effect that elk are enemies of dogs and wolves, is of 
more than passing interest. Judge Caton reported a similar ani- 
mosity of his elk toward dogs, and stated that the does always led 
in the chase of dogs that got into the elk park. If it is true that 
these animals when umhampered by deep snow will attack and van- 
quish dogs and wolves and thus help to protect domestic animals 
grazing in the same pastures, a knowledge of the fact may prove use- 
ful to stockmen and especially to sheep growers. It should be of 
great advantage in changing from a system of herding to the use 
of fenced pastures for flocks. 

It is doubtful whether the enmity of elk for dogs and wolves ex- 
tends to the animals outside of fenced pastures. Ex-President Roose- 
velt in Outdoor Pastimes of an American Hunter reports having 
seen a coyote walking unnoticed among a herd of elk in Yellow- 



40 KAISING DEEE IN THE UNITED STATES. 

stone National Park. Thomas Blagden, of Washington, D. C, in- 
forms the writer that elk taken from the Whitney preserve to Upper 
Saranac Lake in the Adirondacks always ran from barking dogs, and 
were frequently chased from the grounds of cottages near Saranac 
Inn by this means; but possibly the presence of men with the dogs 
had much to do with the fleeing of the elk. 

THE WHITETAIL, OR VIRGINIA DEER. 

Since the whitetail is the most widely distributed of American 
Cervidse, there can be no question of its adaptability to nearly all sec- 
tions of the United States. Testimony as to its hardiness in parks 
and preserves is not so unanimous as in case of the wapiti; but the 
general opinion of breeders is that with suitable range, plenty of 
good water, and reasonable care in winter the business of raising 
the animals for stocking parks and for venison may be made as profit- 
able as any other live-stock industry. It has the advantage that land 
unsuited for cattle may be utilized in raising deer. 

Advocates of the Angora goat industry state that in the United 
States there are 250,000,000 acres of land not suited for tillage nor 
as pasture for horses, cattle, or sheep, which are well adapted to 
goats. Much of this land is equally well suited to deer and elk, 
which do less injury than goats to the forest cover. 

Probably experiments in domestication have oftener been made 
with white-tailed deer than with any other North American mammal. 
The great beauty of the young fawns appealed to the earliest settlers, 
who soon learned how easily they could be tamed and how readily 
they attached themselves to those who fed them. The danger from 
these same pets, especially the males, when grown, was soon learned 
also. Thus the experiment usually ended with the maturity of the 
subject, which was soon disposed of or banished to a safe inclosure. 

Deer parks were established in early times on a considerable num- 
ber of the large estates, or manors, in Maryland, Virginia, and New 
York. At least one of those in Maryland dated back to the seven- 
teenth century. The early parks seem to have been generally stocked 
with fallow deer brought from England. The Revolutionary strug- 
gle marked the destruction of nearly all the private deer preserves; 
but a few of them, especially in Maryland, continued in existence, 
and others were restocked after the end of the war. As few fallow 
deer were imported later, and it was generally believed that our 
native deer were unsuited for park purposes, private preserves did 
not become numerous. The common opinion as to native deer was 
expressed by the eminent authority on landscape gardening, A. J. 
Downing, who in 1852 wrote as follows: 

All attempts to render our native deer really tame on home grounds have, 
so far as we know, failed among us, though with patience the thing may 



EARLY DEER PARKS. 41 

doubtless be done. It would be well worth while to import, the finer breeds of 
English deer, which are thoroughly domesticated in their habits and the most 
beautiful objects for a park. 

When the above was written, both Virginia deer and American 
elk were doing well in a number of parks in the United States, and 
had been acclimatized in parks in England and on the Continent, 
where they were almost as tame and fully as hardy as the fallow 
deer. That these facts should have escaped the notice of Mr. Down- 
ing seems remarkable. 

The American Turf Register and Sporting Magazine for April, 
1831, contains a letter from W. E., of Roanoke, N. C, in which he 
gave interesting details concerning his herd of domesticated deer. 
These he claimed were so tame that his hounds readily distinguished 
their track from those of wild deer that occasionally visited the park. 
He wrote in part : 

One-half of my park being a forest, the deer shelter themselves in it during 
bad weather, and they dislike cold so much that frequently they will not leave 
their shelter to come to the troughs, which are in an unprotected part of the 
inclosure. To prevent fights there should be at least one trough for every two 
deer. I feed them on Indian meal, having found by experience that raw corn 
is apt to swell and kill them. One quart of meal per day is sufficient to keep 
a deer always fat. They are very fond of sweet potatoes, which they will eat 
though half rotten ; they like the leaves but not the root of turnips. 

Deer are very prolific. I have never owned but two does that had less than 
two fawns at a birth. A friend of mine owned a doe that had three fawns 
three years in succession and they were all feniales. * * * 

I have known but one doe to have fawns before she was 2 years old. * * * 
They generally bring forth from the 1st to the 20th of June. The earliest 
that I have known was the ISth of May and the latest the 12th of July. 
Should a doe die leaving fawns, one of the other does attends to the fawns as 
well as if they were her own. Just before the time for them to have young, 
I put them up in six-sided pens made of rails. The fawns at first are quite 
wild. I do not have them turned out of the pens before they are perfectly 
gentle. 

The raising of deer for profit has seldom or never been undertaken 
in a systematic way in the United States. Breeders have stocked 
preserves with deer as game for private use or grown the animals in 
small inclosures for the pleasure of owning them. But the economic 
possibilities are now beginning to be apparent. Some who have 
abandoned the business for lack of proper range are yet convinced 
that it might be made profitable. From a mass of correspondence, 
the writer has selected the experiences which bear most upon eco- 
nomic results and upon the proper management of the animals in 
semidomestication. 

Rural Essays, p. 174, 1854. 



42 RAISING DEER IN THE UNITED STATES. 

EXPERIENCES OF BREEDERS. 

While hunting in the Adirondack^ in 1874, Thomas Blagden, of 
Argyle, near Washington, D. C, captured a pair of fawns and took 
them to his home. In due time these deer bred and became the 
ancestors of several hundred head. In 1902 Mr. Blagden transferred 
48 of his herd to his summer home at Saranac Inn, Upper Saranac 
Lake, in the Adiron clacks. (Plate VII.) On account of insuffi- 
cient range and food, both herds have been greatly reduced by sales, 
and the greater part of the Argyle herd has been destroyed by 
worthless dogs. 

Mr. Blagden is confident that under proper conditions the business 
of raising deer may be made to pay well. In his own herd, by secur- 
ing new bucks from time to time, he has carefully avoided continued 
inbreeding. His stock is vigorous and of the large size character- 
istic of the Adirondack and other northern deer. On this account 
they command an exceptionally high price, $50 each for bucks and 
$75 each for does. He feeds grain, using corn, and a mixture of 
bran and meal. During the summer as much wild food as possible 
is cut for the deer, which always care more for the rankest weeds 
than for the choicest grass. Of hays they prefer alfalfa to other 
kinds. 

Mr. Blagden regards the water supply of a deer park as extremely 
important. Running water should be constantly accessible to the 
animals. He attributes the great winter mortality among wild deer 
in the Adirondacks entirely to the fact that all water courses are 
frozen solid, and to obtain water deer are forced to eat sleet-covered 
shrubbery, which, he thinks, poisons them. 

W. R. McKeen, of Terre Haute, Ind., has a large herd of deer on 
his stock farm near that city. The Sportsmen's Review quoted an 
account of this herd from an Indianapolis newspaper stating that it 
is one of the largest, if not the largest, herd of near-domesticated 
deer in the State. The herd was started nearly twenty years ago 
with about half a dozen animals and with no idea of profit. With 
the exception of a few dairy cows, no other stock is now kept on the 
farm. The demand for deer is fairly active. Each fall a consider- 
able number are sold, and shortly before the Christmas holidays of 
1906 between 30 and 40 were disposed of. The deer are sold to per- 
sons having parks of their own and to museums, menageries, and the 
like. There is also a demand each winter for venison. Altogether 
the sales keep the increase of the herd from overstocking the place." 

Writing March 28, 1908, John W. Grriggs, of Goodell, Iowa, states 
that he has been engaged in raising deer about fourteen years. Until 
two years ago he sold his surplus stock for parks, but since then has 

° Sportsmen's Review, XXXII, 286, Sept. 14, 1907. 



Bui. 36, Biological Survey, U. S. De 



Plate VII. 




BREEDING VIRGINIA DEER. 43 

disposed of about half of it for venison. For park purposes he gets 
$20 to $30 a head ; when fattened for venison they bring $20 to $35 
a head. The animals do well in captivity. Mr. Griggs says fur- 
ther : " In raising a large herd the park should be divided into two 
or three lots, and one plowed each year and sown to red clover, mus- 
tard, rape, and seeds of different kinds of weeds. Blue grass and 
timothy are useless. Corn is the principal grain I feed. I feed it 
winter and summer. In winter I feed also clover hay, oat straw, 
and weedy wild hay. Deer when rightly handled are very prolific, 
and from 50 does one can count on 75 fawns. Deer can be raised 
profitably for venison — very profitably until overdone — but I would 
not advise one to go into it on a large scale without previous expe- 
rience with deer." 

Charles Goodnight, of Goodnight, Tex., writing March 26, 1908, 
states that he kept deer and elk on his plains pastures for a number 
of years, until he became convinced that his ranch was unsuited to 
browsing or partly browsing animals. He says : " With a properly 
selected place, the raising of these animals is not only practicable but 
very profitable. I should select a rough, broken piece of country 
with some prairie and glades, covered with as great a variety of 
shrubbery as possible. Deer will not eat ordinary grass if they can 
help it, but will eat wild rye and other kinds of soft grasses. With 
a properly selected place they are of Very little expense after the 
pasture is fenced." 

R. H. Harris, of Clarksville, Tex., on January 16, 1908, wrote that 
he had been engaged in raising Virginia deer for several years, and 
thinks that the business is admirably adapted for the profitable in- 
vestment of capital. The Virginia deer is suited to almost every sec- 
tion of the United States. It is prolific, each doe usually producing 
twins. These grow very rapidly, and become the most beautiful, 
graceful, and healthy animals known. The demand for venison and 
deerskins is unlimited, the flesh being very high priced in city 
restaurants and cafes. 

" No other meat," says Mr. Harris, " is equal to venison as a diet for 
the sick, it being easily digested and agreeing with the most delicate 
stomachs. Deer are easily tamed; the wildest fawn, if taken from 
the herd when young, will in a few hours become as gentle as a pet 
dog. I have for several years been raising them in large numbers. 
They run at will in woodlands and fields, are never handled, but fed 
occasionally, and are as gentle as a common herd of cattle. They are 
easily and cheaply raised and seldom, if ever, die from natural causes. 
After years of practical experience, I unhesitatingly state that the 
raising of deer is in profitableness second only to the raising of cattle. 

" The cost of feeding deer averages about one-half cent each per 
day. They feed on all kinds of vegetables, buds, and leaves of trees, 



44 RAISING DEER IF THE UNITED STATES. 

growing wheat, clover, peas, barley, oats, etc. Cotton seed is also a 
very cheap and satisfactory food for them. They eat also corn, bran, 
chops, fruit, and in fact anything that man or beast will eat, except 
dry hay. They live from twenty to twenty-five years. They are 
easily confined by a woven wire or barbed wire fence, 6^ feet in 
height." 

A DOMESTICATED HERD OF DEER. 

C. H. Roseberry, of Stella, Mo., writes under date of January 13, 
1908, as follows: 

My experience in breeding the common or Virginia deer covers a period of 
seventeen years, beginning in March, 1891, when as a boy of 16 I built a small 
inclosure of 1| acres to confine a single doe that was captured as a fawn in the 
neighboring forest. A buck and other does were secured from year to year until 
in 1900 by purchase and natural increase my herd numbered 25 head of all ages. 

From 1891 to 1901 I lost every year from disease an average of 20 per cent. 
The climax came in the drought year of 1901, when my loss was 50 per cent 
from the disease known as " black tongue." I am convinced that, as with cholera 
in swine, individuals recovering from this disease are immune from further 
attack. Apparently all of my herd were afflicted. The survivors and their 
progeny constitute my present breeding stock. I have made no purchases since 
1901, nor have I suffered any loss from disease. 

For the last seven years my herd has averaged 70 per cent increase, all of 
which I have sold at satisfactory prices. I began selling at $20 per pair of 
fawns at 4 months of age and $3p per pair of adults. I now get $40 and $60, 
respectively. I sell almost exclusively for pets and for propagating purposes, 
although a few surplus bucks have been sold for venison, averaging me 15 cents 
per pound gross weight. 

If we except the goat, I know of no domestic animal common to the farm that 
requires so little feed and attention as the deer. My herd has a range of only 
15 acres, two-thirds of which is set to white clover, blue grass, and orchard 
grass. I provide also a small plat of wheat or rye for winter pasture. With 
the above provision in this latitude no feed is required between April 15 and 
November 15. During the rest of the year a ration of corn, bran, or other mill 
feed, somewhat smaller than that required for sheep, in connection with a 
stack of clover or pea hay to which they have free access, is sufficient to keep 
them in good condition. Deer eat with relish nearly all of the common coarse 
weeds, and for clearing land of brush they are, I think, second only to the 
common goat. 

Probably the greatest expense connected with the business of raising deer 
is the fencing. Another item of trouble and expense when the animals are 
raised for pets, requiring that they be handled and shipped alive, is the fact 
that the fawns must be taken from the does when 10 days old and raised by 
hand on cow's milk. They are quite easily raised in this way, with but slight 
percentage of loss, but require frequent and careful attention for the first 
month. (Plate VIII.) When they are allowed to run with the does their nat- 
ural wildness can not be overcome, no matter how gentle the does may be. 
(Plate III, fig. 1.) 

I have found the business profitable on the lines indicated. I believe they 
could be profitably bred for venison alone, certainly with less trouble and 
expense, since the fawns would be reared by the does and the trouble and 
expense of raising by hand eliminated. 



Bui. 36, Biological Survey, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 



Plate VIM. 





DEEE HYBRIDS. 45 

My experience does not coincide with that of some othei* breeders in respect 
to the weakening of reproductive powers of deer by their confinement in parks. 
I have no barren does. Usually they produce a single fawn at 2 years of age ; 
afterwards twins, and, in rare cases, triplets. 

INCREASE OF WHITE- TAILED DEER IN DOMESTICATION. 

Early in 1900 a pet doe heavy with fawn was delivered at the 
Taney County, Mo., game preserve belonging to the St. Louis Park 
and Agricultural Company. The doe had been thoroughly domesti- 
cated, and, refusing to join the wild deer in the preserve, remained 
near the home of the tenant and under the immediate care of his 
family. In the spring of 1900 she gave birth to two fawns, both does, 
which became as gentle as the mother. In the spring of 1901 the 
old doe again dropped 2 fawns. In 1902 there was an increase of 
4 fawns, each of the young of 1900 having given birth to a fawn. 
By the spring of 1905 the domestic herd had increased to 25 deer, 
all the increase of 1 pet doe. & 

A herd of mule deer at Crawfordsville, Ind., has increased with 
almost equal rapidity. These deer belong to James F. Boots, and 
are kept in a 4-acre inclosure. Mr. Boots writes that in 1899 he 
brought a buck fawn from Colorado, and nearly four years later he 
secured 2 adult does. From this stock he has had fawns as follows : 
1904, 4; 1905, 4; 1906, 8; 1907, 10; 1908, 5; 1909, 10; from the 5 does 
then kept. All were raised except those born in 1908, the loss of 
which was attributed to excessive heat. 

DEER HYBRIDS. 

However undesirable hybrids among wild animals may be regarded 
by naturalists, the production of them among domesticated or semi- 
domesticated species is of great economic importance. The experi- 
ments of breeders in hybridizing deer, aside from the apparent value 
of the results obtained, are highly interesting. Mention has already 
been made of hybrids between the American wapiti and the red deer 
as well as the Altai wapiti. The first of these crosses was obtained 
by the Prince of Pless, in Silesia, about a half century ago. 

Judge Caton made experiments at Ottawa, 111., and obtained a 
number of hybrids, the most important being those between the Vir- 
ginia deer and the Acapulco deer (Odocoileus toltecus) and between 
the Virginia deer and the Ceylon deer (Gervus axis). These deer 
exhibited no natural tendency to breed together, but when the male 
of the exotic species was absent or accidentally lost he introduced 
the buck of the Virginia deer. 

a Cf. Caton, J. D., Antelope and Deer of North America, p. 304, 1877. 
6 Second Annual Report Missouri Game and Fish Warden, p. 20, 1907. 



46 RAISING DEER IN THE UNITED STATES. 

John W. Griggs, of Goodell, Iowa, has succeeded in crossing the 
mule deer with several races of the whitetail. The hybrids were ob- 
tained by isolating the pairs in separate yards. As long as the dif- 
ferent species or races are kept in a common pasture, each kind herds 
by itself and no sexual association between the different kinds takes 
place. Under such circumstance or in the wild state crosses are ex- 
ceedingly rare. Mr. Griggs obtained his hybrids by placing a buck 
of the mule deer with whitetail does before the rut began, and the 
offspring proved to be highly satisfactory as to size and stamina, 
and also were perfectly fertile. As was to be expected, however, 
offspring in the second generation of hybrids varied much in form, 
size, and other characteristics, and on the whole were not so satisfac- 
tory as the first generation. He thinks that his hybrids with the mule 
deer have stronger constitutions than the Virginia deer and are less 
liable to disease. 

Charles Goodnight, of Goodnight, Tex., writes that he crossed the 
mule deer with the white-tailed deer with great success, making a 
valuable and beautiful animal with greater size and better meat than 
the common deer. The hybrids were fertile also, and Mr. Goodnight 
would have continued his experiments further, but, having no shrub- 
bery or trees within his range, he found it unsuited to deer and liber- 
ated his herd. 

HABITS AND MANAGEMENT OF VIRGINIA DEER. 

Deer are polygamous like cattle. The rutting season is in Novem- 
ber, the period of gestation is 205 to 212 days (about seven months), 
and the fawns are born in May or June. The young does breed 
usually when about seventeen months old, and have but one fawn the 
first time; afterwards they commonly have twins. The fawns are 
spotted, and remain so until the hair is shed in the fall. 

The white-tailed deer is even more a browsing animal than the elk ; 
and yet it can and often does manage to get along in summer on 
grass alone. In a cultivated pasture it eats rank weeds and wild 
grasses in preference to timothy or blue grass. Observation of deer 
feeding in a pasture several hundred feet away is insufficient to 
determine accurately what they are eating. A writer in The Ameri- 
can Field states that he often saw mule deer apparently eating grass 
in the Colorado parks, and he had no doubt that they did so until a 
hunter informed him that they would not eat grass unless they 
could obtain no other food. Afterwards he had a number of times 
examined the stomachs of deer he had killed, and only once found 
what was unmistakably grass.® 

a American Field, XXII, 609, Dec. 27. 1884. 



HABITS OF VIRGINIA DEER. 47 

The Biological Survey has examined a few stomachs of deer killed 
in the United States. A Columbia black-tailed deer taken in the 
Chemise Mountains, Mendocino County, Cal., had eaten acorns and 
an equal bulk of foliage, mostly willow leaves. A young deer of the 
same species taken on Mount Shasta, California, had grass in its 
stomach. Three individuals of the Arizona race of white-tailed deer 
{Odocoileus virginianus couesi), taken at different times, had eaten, 
respectively, leaves of the little blue live oak (Quercus grisea), 
with some flowers and flower stems of Nolina lindkeimeriana ; green 
foliage, seeds, berries, and the pods, beans, and leaves of Acacia sp. ; 
and green leaves of Th-ermopsis montana, vetch, strawberry, gera- 
nium, Senecio (two species), aspen, and a flat green lichen — no trace 
of grass or acorns. A white-tailed deer killed in Minnesota in April 
had nothing but lichens in its stomach. 

In captivity deer eat almost every kind of vegetation, including 
all sorts of garden stuff. They are fond of acorns, beechnuts, chest- 
nuts, and other mast. Lily pads, fallen leaves, lichens, and mosses 
are freely eaten; so that, with plenty of range and an abundant 
variety of plants, there is little difficulty about food for deer. A 
good supply of running water must be provided, and the animals 
should have access to rock salt. If the browse and pasture are scant, 
some grain should be fed even in summer, and it is best to feed regu- 
larly in winter. Of the grains, corn is generally recommended; 
there is no waste in feeding it, as deer pick up every grain. Coarse 
hay full of weeds is preferable to timothy or other tame hays, ex- 
cept alfalfa. Of clover hay, deer usually pick out the dry flower 
heads greedily, but waste the other parts. In the northern half of 
the United States winter shelter should be provided for deer. 

The practice of pasturing hogs in deer parks is objectionable, since 
they destroy nearly all the mast. For this reason the wild boar is 
unsuited for American game preserves iutended for deer and wild 
turkeys. 

vicious BUCKS. 

The dangerous character of some deer, especially the males, in semi- 
domestication has already been discussed. The whitetail is no excep- 
tion. Charles C. TVorthington, writing to the Biological Survey of 
his experience with vicious bucks, says : 

The first serious difficulty I experienced, and one the gravity of which should 
not be lost sight of by anyone starting a preserve, was with the tame bucks at 
the rutting season. These bucks from being tame and docile would become at 
this season fierce and dangerous. They would attack anyone at sight, even a 
person on horseback or in a wagon. Some of the gamekeepers had narrow 
escapes from being killed; in one or two instances being seriously injured. A 
pedestrian's only chance for escape was to climb a tree. Those bucks which 
developed this ferocity had to be systematically hunted and shot on sight. 



48 RAISING DEER IN THE UNITED STATES. 

Those left were the ones that had not been originally tamed, and not being: 
accustomed to the sight of man, had not courage enough to make an attack. My 
experience is that a wild buck, even in the rutting season, still retains his nat* 
ural fear of man, and, except when wounded, is never dangerous. 

Instances of fatalities from attacks of vicious bucks of the Virginia 
deer are not lacking*. A rather recent one was the death of Herbert 
Bradley at Montclair, N. J., November 10, 1906. While working 
alone on his grounds, he was attacked by a pet deer and so badly 
wounded that he bled to death before aid could be obtained. 

The remarks about castrating the elk apply as well to the common 
deer. A number of vigorous bucks, however, must form a part of any 
considerable herd, for a single buck can serve only a limited number 
of does. One buck for each ten or twelve does will probably be 
enough. New bucks should frequently be introduced to avoid in- 
breeding. 

CAPTURING LIVE DEER FOR SHIPMENT. 

In 1887 C. W. Marsh, of De Kalb, 111., in a letter to The American 
Field, said: 

Thirteen years ago this spring I fenced in a few acres of natural woodland 
with a bit of prairie adjoining my residence lot for deer ; the fence was 82 feet 
high and proportionately strong. I advertised for deer, and during the season 
got a buck from Sioux City, caught in Dakota ; a doe from Kansas ; another 
from Missouri ; and still another from a gentleman in De Kalb, this last having 
been sent to him when a fawn from Arkansas. They were all red or Virginia 
deer, but showed considerable difference in size, form, and disposition; and 
they were all tame ; that is, had been pets and would bear handling ; hence had 
come quietly and unharmed in their cages. These began breeding at once, the 
does dropping two fawns generally. The young deer were as wild probably as 
any in the forest at first, but as the does were tame they also soon became 
quite tame, though not one has ever submitted to handling. They were rugged, 
hearty fellows, and in course of a few years I had a herd of over twenty. Occa- 
sionally I killed one for venison, and as they increased so fast I caught and 
gave a number to friends and sold a few. While the old does lived the young 
were easily caught, as the former would go into any cage or trap for food dur- 
ing the winter months and the latter would follow, and although they would 
struggle fiercely when caught, they gave up and quieted down as soon as hands 
were removed. None were lost in shipping. In due time the old does died, and 
all of my present herd except one buck were dropped by does that were bred 
in the park. Apparently each succeeding generation became wilder and more 
difficult to catch, and I have for some few years past thinned them out in the fall 
by shooting and marketing them. Still, they always answer my whistle and 
come around me for food. * * * 

They are hardy, active, and very shy of anything strange, but manifest strong 
attachment for home. Several times during these many years dogs have gotten 
into the park and run some of them out. When scared thus, nothing will 
stop them, and they will either go through or over any fence — they have 
frequently bounded over mine, 81 feet high — but when out they will usually 
jump back again of their own volition, even though they had been off in the 
woods or about the park outside for weeks. In such instances they hung 



CAPTURING DEER FOR SHIPMENT. 49 

around for a time seeking an easy entrance apparently (it is useless to try to 
drive them in), and failing in that they finally jumped over or smashed through 
the fence. When out they are very wild, but when they get in will come up 
for feed and be as tame and unconcerned as before. 

As a culmination to the increasing wildness of his herd, Mr. Marsh 
found that in capturing and crating deer which he sold for stocking 
purposes he lost a large per cent as a result of exhaustion from their 
struggles. Mr. Blagden relates a like experience in shipping live 
deer to purchasers, but later he overcame the difficulty by an ingen- 
ious trapping device. Charles C. Worthington uses a similar trap at 
his Warren County (N. J.) preserve. 

In a recent letter to the Biological Survey, Mr. Worthington de- 
scribes his deer trap as follows: 

As a demand exists for deer to be used for the restocking of state lands and 
for establishing private preserves, I, several years ago, began experiments in 
trapping them. It was well known that a wild deer caught in any small in- 
closure of wire will kill himself in his efforts to escape, but believing that 
he would not do this if the fence were made in such a way as to prevent his 
seeing through it, I constructed an oblong trap, about 20 feet wide and 30 feet 
deep, of boards 10 feet high, nailed closely together, so that nothing could be 
seen through them. A board door of the same height and running loosely in 
vertical grooves was fitted to one end, and opposite to it a narrow board 
passageway was built just high enough for a deer to enter and about 5 feet 
long ; at the outer extremity of this passageway was placed a similar sliding 
door, big enough to close tightly the end of the passage. The main door is 
held open by a wire that extends several hundred feet to a blind, where the 
trapper stands concealed. When the snows are on the ground, this trap is 
baited with tempting food, which the deer finally enter the trap to secure. 
When it is found that they enter the trap without hesitation, a man stations 
himself on watch, and at such time as a number of deer are inside, drops the 
sliding door and imprisons them. They are left for a few hours until their 
first fright is somewhat allayed. Then crates, just large enough to hold one 
deer, and having only enough openings to supply sufficient ventilation, are 
placed, one at a time, in front of the smaller sliding door at the end of the 
passage. The crates are provided with a corresponding door. These being 
raised, the deer are made to enter the crates one at a time, and so are secured. 
The men, during this entire operation, remain concealed. 

This form of trap has proved effective and satisfactory in every way. There 
have been caught in it during the last few years over 300 deer, which have been 
transferred to various localities throughout the country with a death rate of 
less than 4 per cent. The trapping operations have to be discontinued by the 
middle of February, owing to the does being then so heavy with fawn that any 
attempt to crate and transfer them is attended with too much risk. 

The game commissioners of Pennsylvania and New Jersey have purchased 
numbers of these deer to be liberated in various parts of their respective States. 
The experiment of restocking districts from which these animals disappeared 
long ago has proven most successful and popular. 

o American Field, XXVII, 295, 1887. 



50 RAISING DEER IN THE UNITED STATES. 

WILD DEER IN PRIVATE PRESERVES. 

In many parts of the United States private preserves have been 
established by either individuals or associations and stocked with 
deer and other big game. Such enterprises have met opposition from 
both citizens and sportsmen, the latter being- frequently ousted from 
favorite hunting grounds by the fencing and posting of such pre- 
serves. The feeling against large deer parks in America is in part a 
survival of an Old World prejudice against them, but in the main 
results from doubt of the wisdom of permitting large holdings of 
unproductive land. In a majority of the States private preserves 
are still subject to all the game laws of the State, so far as time and 
manner of hunting in them are concerned, and thus the owners are 
unable to reap the full economic advantage of their possession. While 
these conditions prevail, large game preserves are open to the objec- 
tion that they are sources of wealth which are not fully utilized. 

A few private preserves have been stocked with exotic game — red 
deer, wild boars, and the like — and in many of them large expendi- 
tures have been necessary to provide good sport. In some of the 
States the rights of owners of such preserves to the unrestricted use 
of the game within them is not clear, while such rights are clearly set 
forth or denied in the laws of others. As long as game within the 
preserve is comparatively scarce, owners will be content to use it in 
strict conformity to the hunting laws of the State. But when the 
game increases so as to overstock the preserve, or to become a source 
of revenue to the promoters, greater privileges will be demanded and 
will have to be granted, for grades of domesticity in deer and elk 
are not sharply drawn, and there is no difference, so far as owner- 
ship is concerned, between those raised in parks for venison and those 
produced in a fenced preserve for sport. 

Full recognition of private ownership in game does not interfere 
with the right of the. State so to regulate its disposal as not to jeopard- 
ize the preservation of wild game. Game regulations must be insisted 
upon, and the owners of private preserves will usually be as vigilant 
as anyone in helping to enforce them. 

The increase of white-tailed deer, when protected within suitable 
large fenced preserves, is remarkably rapid, and there is no doubt as 
to success in propagating them under natural conditions as wild 
game. The experience of a large number of hunting clubs and indi- 
viduals that have stocked preserves is favorable. In the ten years 
between 1892 and 1902 deer in Buckland Park, the Warren County, 
N. J., preserve belonging to Charles C. Worthington, increased from 
19 to about 400 head, a number considered too large for the sustain- 
ing capacity of the park. The St. Louis Park and Agricultural Com- 
pany have about 1,000 deer and 400 elk on their large preserve in 
Taney County, Mo. About six years ago the Otzinachson Rod and 



EFFECT OF PRESERVES ON GAME SUPPLY. 51 

Gun Club, of Clinton County, Pa., placed about 90 deer, mostly does, 
in their 4,000-acre park. These have multiplied to nearly 2,000 head, 
and a further increase of about 1,000 fawns was expected during the 
season of 1908. These experiences in stocking large preserves with 
deer, although highly successful, are probably not exceptional. 

EFFECT ON GAME SUPPLY. 

The effect of private preserves on the supply of game in the State 
should not be overlooked. While they may temporarily restrict the 
hunting privileges of a few citizens, ultimately they become a source 
of game supply secondary in importance only to state preserves. 
Already a number of private preserves have become overstocked, and 
game has escaped or been turned out to become the property of the 
people. Both deer and elk are said to have escaped from the Corbin 
preserve in New Hampshire and from the Whitney preserve in 
Massachusetts. The game in the well-stocked preserve of Dr. W. S. 
Webb in the Adirondacks became the property of the State when, in 
1903, the owner demolished the fences which for many years had sur- 
rounded his 8,000-acre park. 

Charles C. Worthington writes, May 21, 1908, that when, in 1902, 
the deer in his New Jersey preserve became too numerous to be sup- 
ported by the acreage inclosed, several wide gates were left open for a 
few months. Few of the animals availed themselves of the oppor- 
tunity to escape. Mr. Worthington says : " There was little incentive 
for them to leave the inclosure, and most of those that did probably 
returned at the first alarm, their instinct directing them to the in- 
closure as a protected, safe retreat. The few that remained outside 
have increased in numbers, until now the region round about for a 
radius of several miles is well stocked. While some complaint has 
been made by the farmers in the neighborhood that the deer destroy 
some of their grain, the general sentiment is in favor of having the 
laws for their protection rigidly enforced." 

The success of private enterprise in propagating deer in inclosures 
is an object lesson for state game commissions and others, and sug- 
gests that the State should undertake similar work for the public. 
The establishment of game preserves on public lands of the State is 
a most important step in game preservation, especially if the lands 
are already stocked with wild deer. But the further introduction 
of breeding animals will hasten multiplication, until the preserve be- 
comes a source of game supply for the surrounding territory. While 
more national preserves are needed, a system of state preserves is all- 
important. Those already established in Pennsylvania and other 
States have proved highly useful, and it may truthfully be said that 
in every country that has tried them, public game preserves have been 
instrumental in increasing the game supply. 



52 RAISING DEER IN THE UNITED STATES. 

GAME PROPAGATION AND GAME LAWS. 

The chief obstacle to profitable game propagation in the United 
States lies in the restrictive character of state laws affecting the kill- 
ing, sale, and transportation of game. Many of the States, follow- 
ing precedent, lay down the broad rule that all the game in the State, 
whether resident or migratory, is the property of the State. A few 
of them, notably Nebraska, North Dakota, and Tennessee, except 
such game animals as are " under private ownership legally acquired." 
A few others encourage private ownership by providing means by 
which wild animals may be captured for domestication. Generally, 
where private ownership of game is recognized by law, the right to 
kill such game is granted, but the owner is hampered by the same 
regulations as to season, sale, and shipment that apply to wild game. 
One by one, however, state legislatures are coming to recognize the 
interests of game propagators and to modify the game laws to meet 
the changed view. 

TRANSPORTATION OF LIVE DEER. 

Except in a few States that provide for the capture of wild deer 
under permits, the only source of stock for private preserves is the 
animals already in captivity. Hitherto the shipment of live deer 
and elk from private preserves has often been permitted because 
game wardens and others interested could see no advantage from 
interfering, notwithstanding that a literal construction of the law 
in many States would absolutely forbid such shipments. Pennsyl- 
vania is one of the few States that give owners of private deer pre- 
serves the positive right to sell and ship deer or fawns at any time 
for propagating purposes. 

TRANSPORTATION OE VENISON. 

Under the license system and within specified limitations, some of 
the States permit the holder of a hunting license to ship venison 
lawfully killed to his home within or without the State. The gen- 
eral transportation of venison, as well as its export out of the State 
in which it was killed, is usually forbidden. Only a few States 
permit the export of deer, and two of them — Delaware and Ohio- 
have no deer, so that the animals are not mentioned in recent game 
laws of those States. The laws forbidding export usually specify 
deer or parts of the carcasses of deer; so that the legal shipment of 
live deer is impossible except in States which make provision for their 
export for propagating purposes. 

Before 1909 the two sections in the game law of New York refer- 
ring to the killing and sale of deer specified " wild deer," but in the 
section relating to transportation the word " deer " was unqualified. 
The manner in which this omission at first affected the owner of a 



KILLING DEER RAISED IN PRIVATE PARKS. 53 

private preserve is illustrated by the decision rendered in 1907 in the 
case of Dieterich v. Fargo. 

The American Express Company refused to receive and transport 
deer raised and killed in a private preserve in Dutchess County. 
The owner of the herd, Charles F. Dieterich, found it necessary to 
kill some of the bucks each year and ship them to New York for 
sale. On the refusal of the express company to transport his venison, 
he applied for a. temporary injunction against its president, James 
C. Fargo, claiming that the law prohibiting transportation did not 
apply to domesticated deer. The supreme court of New York 
County, in December, 1906, decided in favor of Dieterich. This 
decision was reversed by the appellate division of the supreme court 
of the State, May 10, 1907, by a majority of the court. The opinion 
by Justice O 'Gorman was to the effect that the section of the law 
prohibiting the transportation of deer from one county to another, 
and requiring express companies to refuse to accept deer when not 
accompanied by the owner, applied to domesticated as well as to wild 
deer. The transportation of deer raised on a private preserve was 
held to be subordinate to the police power of the State. One of the 
dissenting opinions held that Dieterich had the same natural and 
legal right to fence his farm and devote it to the propagation of 
deer that he had to use it for raising cattle or sheep. 

To market his deer in 1908 Mr. Dieterich resorted to the novel 
expedient of paying transportation for a number of men in the city 
of New York to go to his country preserve, each shoot a deer and 
accompany the carcass to market, as required by the law. However, 
the New York court of appeals finally, February 23, 1909, reversed 
the decision of the lower court and held — one of the six judges dis- 
senting — that the law concerning transportation of venison did not 
apply to that from domesticated deer bred in confinement, and that 
the owner of suchNieer was not restricted as to the number he may 
kill and ship during the open season. The law regulating transpor- 
tation of venison has recently been amended to provide for shipment 
from private preserves. 

As would be expected by those familiar with the history of British 
deer preserves, the laws of the various Canadian Provinces are in 
general more liberal toward the owners of private deer parks. The 
general tariff law of Canada permits the export of any home-bred 
deer under regulations made by the Governor General in Council. 

KILLING DEER RAISED IN PRIVATE PARKS. 

The failure to except deer kept in private preserves from the opera- 
tion of the laws providing a close season for wild deer prevents 
the owner of deer from using the venison for food in his own family. 

102 N. Y., Supp. 720. 



54 KAISING DEEE IN THE UNITED STATES. 

He is restricted to a very short open season at a time when, on account 
of the rut, the animals are least desirable for food. If permitted 
to sell the venison, even in his own State or county, he must do it 
during the same limited period, when, owing to the presence of wild 
game in the market, he may be compelled to accept an extremely low 
price. To make the business of growing A^enison profitable, the 
grower must be able to choose his own time for marketing the 
product, as in case of beef or pork. 

SALE OF VENISON. 

In more than half the States and Territories the sale of venison 
from private preserves is illegal at all times, and until recently the 
sale was illegal in nearly all the States. Several States now forbid 
the sale of venison produced within them, but permit the sale of that 
imported from other States, a most unjust discrimination against 
home industry. 

A recent experience in Pottawattamie County, Iowa, illustrates 
how the law sometimes affects private ownership of deer. The facts 
are gathered from newspapers, but in the main have been verified by 
correspondence. J. Cuppy, of Avoca, owned a herd of 20 deer, but 
died a few years ago without direct heirs and without having made 
provision for the deer, which had escaped from their inclosure. The 
administrators could not catch the animals nor lawfully kill them. 
The herd has increased to nearly 200 head of partly wild deer. They 
forage on the farms and gardens of the neighborhood, doing some 
damage, especially to stacks of alfalfa and corn shocks. No one may 
legally kill them, and prosecutions promptly followed when the county 
officials learned that a few of them had been shot and converted into 
venison. 

The decision in the case of the State of Missouri v. Weber (102 
S. W., 955) further illustrates the tendency of courts to give a 
literal interpretation to laws in order to uphold police regulations 
concerning game. Eight deer, from which the evidences of sex had 
been removed, were exposed for sale in the Kansas City market. 
They had been raised on a stock farm in Henry County, and came 
from a tame herd which had been in possession of the owner for 
twenty-five years. They were kept with cattle in a pasture sur- 
rounded by a high fence. The animals were never hunted, but the 
owner had been accustomed to kill several of them every year for 
sale in the Kansas City market. Defendant Weber was arrested and 
tried in the Jackson County criminal court in December, 1906. The 
defense was that the law did not refer to tame but to wild deer. The 
defendant was found guilty, and appealed his case. It was trans- 
ferred from the court of appeals to the supreme court, which in its 
decision upheld the lower court. The court held that the law applied 



STATE LAWS CONCERNING DEER IN PARKS. 55 

to tame deer £s well as wild, and further that the act did not violate 
the constitutional prohibition of taking private property for public 
uses without compensation. 

George S. Good, of Lock Haven, Pa., wrote in April, 1908, that 
deer had multiplied so rapidly in the preserve belonging to the 
Otzinachson Rod and Gun Club that the annual increase would soon 
reach about 1,000 animals. He thought the time not far distant when 
the club would be compelled to market or dispose of 1,000 deer each 
year to prevent overstocking the preserve. But at that time the law 
of the State did not permit the club to sell these animals except to 
stock other preserves; neither could they be killed except in strict 
conformity with the laws of the State concerning wild deer. Each of 
the 14 members of the club or guests of the club could take one deer 
in the open season. 

If the surplus animals from large preserves like that just men- 
tioned could be turned into venison and sold judiciously, they would 
become a source of steady revenue. A thousand adult deer marketed 
when the time is favorable should yield a gross income of nearly 
$25,000 a j^ear. The Pennsylvania legislature of 1909 passed a law 
providing a. means by which venison from private parks may be sold 
in the open season. 

Attorney-General Atkinson, of Washington, in 1906, delivered an 
opinion concerning game raised in captivity, part of which is of 
interest in this connection: 

It is a well-known principle of law in States generally that wild birds or ani- 
mals which have been kept in captivity and have become more or less domesti- 
cated, when reclaimed by the art and power of man, are the subject of qualified 
property, and are, as a general rule, under the protection of the law the same as 
any other property, and are at the disposal of the owner for using or selling 
as he desires. This seems to have been the law for thousands of years in 
civilized countries, and it would seem to have been the sensible principle to 
follow ; for without doubt all animals and birds were once wild in ferse naturae 
state, and by the application of this principle all people have tamed and 
acquired domesticity in animals and fowls from the game state, from elephants 
and horses and cattle down to chickens and canary birds. 

It is my opinion that our laws in this State covering the subject were in- 
tended by the legislatures to relate strictly to game, meaning animals and birds 
in their wild, free, roving state, and these statutes were not intended in any 
manner to limit or prevent any probable or possible occupation or industrial 
development relating to the growing and raising and domesticating of any 
kinds of birds or animals for food products and the general use of the people. 

STATE LAWS THAT RECOGNIZE PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OF DEER. 

Recognition of the rights of private ownership in deer and other 
big game is now given in laws of the States named below. It will 
be observed that most of the provisions were enacted recently. 

Arkansas. — " Nothing in this act shall be so construed as to pre- 
vent any person or persons from having in their possession or buying 



56 RAISING DEER IN THE UNITED STATES. 

or selling or shipping or any railroad from receiving for transporta- 
tion any deer or fawn when such deer or fawn is raised in captivity 
for domestic purposes and is accompanied by an affidavit from the 
raiser to this state of facts." (Acts of 1907, No. 43.) 

Colorado. — No one may maintain a private fish or game preserve 
for profit without taking out a license to do so. Owners of licensed 
private preserves are permitted to sell and ship deer or other quadru- 
peds, if the carcasses or live animals are accompanied by proper 
invoice and a permit from the state game and fish commissioner. A 
fee is charged for the license and for each animal shipped by permit. 
(Laws of 1899, ch. 98.) 

Florida. — An act passed in 1909 protects private preserves from 
trespass. Such preserves are limited to 640 acres, and must be care- 
fully posted. The game in them may not be killed for three years, 
and thereafter only in compliance with the general hunting laws of 
the State. (Ch. 5940.) 

Illinois. — " Provided, that any person who breeds and raises deer 
for market, where the same has been bred and raised within an 
inclosure, may kill and sell the same from October 1 to February 1." 
(Laws of 1909, p. 236.) 

Indiana. — The section against killing and possession of game has 
this clause : " Provided, that the provisions of this section shall not 
apply to any person or persons owning or having under his domain 
or control any deer, buck, doe, or fawn bred or raised in any deer 
park." This would permit sale of venison, but probably not its 
export. (Laws of 1907, ch. 219.) 

Iowa. — The statutes declare it unlawful for any person other than 
the owner or person authorized by the owner to kill, maim, trap, or 
in any way injure or capture any deer, elk, or goat, except when dis- 
trained as provided by law. As Iowa has no wild deer except the 
few that have escaped from a private herd, the sale of venison from 
private preserves is not prohibited. 

Kentucky. — The state law especially protects game in parks from 
poaching and trespass. (Stats., sec. 1250.) 

Maine. — The game and fish commissioners are authorized by law to 
grant permits to capture moose, caribou, deer, and birds for park 
purposes within the State. This does not permit the sale of such 
game. (Rev. Stat. 1903, ch. 32, sec. 40.) 

Massachusetts. — The owner may at any time kill or sell his own 
tame deer kept on his own grounds. (Acts of 1907, ch. 307.) 

Michigan. — An act passed in 1909 makes it unlawful to capture or 
destroy deer kept within or that have escaped from any private 
inclosure. (No. 167.) 

Minnesota. — Persons who desire to domesticate deer, moose, elk, 
or caribou may secure a permit to do so from the state board of game 



STATE LAWS CONCERNING DEER IN PARKS. 57 

and fish commissioners by paying a fee of 50 cents for each animal in 
captivity and a like fee for each animal added later by natural 
increase or otherwise. The animals kept in captivity may be sold or 
shipped within or without the State by written permission from the 
commission. (Laws of 1899, ch. 161.) 

Missouri. — " Nothing in this act shall be construed to prevent the 
shipment of deer or elk, alive or dead, from private preserves, when 
such elk or deer are raised in captivity." (Laws of 1909, p. 536.) 

New Harri'pshire. — The Blue Mountain Forest Association may kill 
elk, deer, and moose within the confines of its game preserve until 
January 15 of each year and transport them outside the State at 
any time when accompanied by a certificate from the fish and game 
commission. (Pub. Stat. 1901, ch. 131, sec. 6.) 

New York. — Deer may be sold during the open season, and moose, 
elks, caribou, and antelope from private parks may be sold during the 
same period. Common carriers may transport animals into the State 
for breeding purposes. The section forbidding transportation of 
venison was recently (1909) amended to provide that it "shall not 
apply to domesticated deer propagated in wholly inclosed deer parks, 
when shipments made from such parks are accompanied by a permit 
issued by the forest, fish, and game commission under conditions pre- 
scribed by the commissioner." (Ch. 474.) 

North Carolina. — Twenty-two counties permit the owner and 
keeper of an inclosed game reserve, who raises deer for use or sale, to 
kill, sell, or use those raised or kept in said inclosure. These laws 
were passed in 1907 and 1909. 

North Dakota. — The state game and fish board of control is author- 
ized to issue permits to breed or domesticate any of the game birds 
or animals mentioned in the law. An annual report is required from 
persons holding such permits, and they may sell or ship game within 
or without the State upon receipt of written permission to do so from 
the board. (Laws of 1909, ch. 128.) 

Oklahoma. — A section of the law passed in 1909 permits the sale 
of domesticated game animals and birds within the State. The law 
is silent on the subject of their export. (Ch. 19.) 

Pennsylvania. — The state board of game commissioners may issue 
propagating certificates to individuals or associations that desire to 
raise deer or other large game animals. The land shall be inclosed 
by an approved wire fence not less than 8 feet high. All wild deer 
must first be driven from the land under the direction of a repre- 
sentative of the state board. A careful account of all game raised or 
brought to the preserve must be kept and reports of any increase 
made annually to the board. Deer may be killed inside the preserve 
and shipped only during the open season and for thirty days there- 
after. They may be shipped alive for propagating purposes at any 



58 RAISING DEER IN THE UNITED STATES. 

time. Each deer or carcass of deer shipped from the preserve must 
bear a tag furnished by the state board, by which it may be identified 
at any time. (Acts of 1909, No. 204.) 

South Dakota. — The state game warden may issue permits to breed 
or domesticate deer, moose, elk, caribou, buffalo, or game birds. 
Annual reports are required from holders of permits. On receipt of 
written permission from the game warden, any of the animals held 
in possession in private preserves may be sold or shipped within or 
without the State. (Laws of 1909, ch. 240.) 

Vermont. — A person may kill, sell, or dispose of deer which were 
obtained without the State and are owned and confined by him in a 
park or inclosure. (Pub. Stat. 1906, sec. 5326.) 

Wisconsin. — The fish and game warden may issue permits to breed 
or domesticate deer, moose, elk, or caribou. A system of marking 
the animals in preserves established under the permits is authorized, 
and such animals may be sold or shipped within or without the State 
upon receipt of written permission to do so from the state game and 
fish warden. A tag identifying the animal by number must accom- 
pany every carcass or part of the carcass shipped or exposed for sale. 
(Laws of 1909, ch. 525.) 

A few other States except from the declaration of state ownership 
of game that which is " under private ownership legally acquired." 
In the absence of specific laws permitting the sale and export of such 
game, there is uncertainty as to how courts would decide concerning 
the rights of game propagators in these States. 

RESOLUTIONS BY THE AMERICAN BREEDERS' ASSOCIATION. 

At the annual meeting of the American Breeders' Association held 
in Washington, D. C, January 28-30, 1908, the subject of breeding 
game and fur mammals had an important place on the programme, 
and at the close of the sessions, January 30, the following preamble 
and resolution were adopted: 

Whereas there are vast possibilities in our wild meat, fur, and game mammals, 
and birds, as a basis for stocking our private and public forest reserves and 
game preserves with a view to the conservation and fuller utilization of our 
natural resources and as a source of blood to be used in forming hybrids with 
domestic animals; therefore, 

Resolved, That the American Breeders' Association urge the attention of Con- 
gress, of state legislatures, sportsmen's societies, and private parties to the 
preservation of the American bison, the various members of the deer family, 
mountain sheep, arctic foxes, grouse, pheasants, quail, and other mammals and 
birds, and the carrying out of experiments to determine their wide use on lands 
not suited to domestic species and the determination of their value in the foun- 
dation of hybrid animals designed for production under wild and semidomesti- 
cated conditions. 



SUMMARY. 59 

At the annual meeting of the same association held at Columbia, 
Mo., January 6-8, 1909, the following resolution was adopted : 

Restflved, That state laws regulating shooting, possession, and handling of 
game should be amended so as to permit the sale of live game for propagation 
at all times. That hand-reared game and game reared in a wild state by breed- 
ers (including farmers) should be distinguished by law so that such preserved 
game can be sold legally under state regulations, except during the breeding 
season. 

SUMMARY. 

The foregoing information relating to the raising of deer, elk, 
and other large game animals in confinement may be briefly summar- 
ized in the following conclusions: 

The rearing of wild game mammals, both native and introduced, 
offers a promising field for experiment, as well as for the practical 
investment of capital. 

The Rocky Mountain elk and the Virginia deer can be reared suc- 
cessfully and cheaply under different conditions in regard to food 
and climate, as has been proved by many successful experiments. The 
complete domestication of either species is a possibility which, if 
realized, would be a source of lasting benefit to the world. With 
proper encouragement, the production of venison from both elk and 
deer can be made profitable industries on lands unsuited for cattle, 
horses, or sheep. The rearing of both species for stocking parks and 
game preserves would for a time be even more profitable than the 
production of venison. 

Instead of hampering breeders by restrictions, state laws should 
be modified so as to encourage the raising of deer as a source of wealth 
to the individual and the State. Safeguards against the destruction 
and sale of wild deer for domesticated deer are necessary. For this 
purpose a system of licensing private parks or of inspecting and 
tagging or otherwise marking live animals or carcasses sold or shipped 
is recommended. 

It is believed that with proper encouragement much of the other- 
wise waste land in the United States may be made to yield profitable 
returns from the production of venison, and that this excellent and 
nutritious meat, instead of being denied to 99 per cent of the popula- 
tion of the country, may become as common and as cheap in our 
markets as mutton. 



INDEX 



Acclimatization of the eland 13 

of the nilgai 14 

^Esthetic reason for domesticating animals. . . 9 

Agriculture and transportation , mammals for . 10 

Alces americana 18 

gigas 18 

machlis 18 

American Breeders' Association 58 

resolutions, 1908 58 

resolutions, 1909 59 

American Institute 30 

American antelope 11 

protection 12 

range 11 

venison 12 

Antelopes, exotic 13 

smaller 14 

Antilocapra americana 11 

Antlers 15 

of Altai wapiti 22 

uses 15 

Arkansas, deer raised in captivity 55 

Atkinson, Attorney-General, of Washington . 55 
Audubon and Bachman on domestication of 

elk 28 

Axis deer 23 

Baird, S. F 11, 16, 18, 29 

Bedford, Duke of, parks belonging to. . 13, 14, 22, 23 

Binney, Henry, fence for elk 37 

Blagden, Thomas, experience with deer ... 40, 42, 49 

Blaubok, extermination 9 

Blue Mountain Forest Association 57 

Blue Mountain Park 19,28,57 

Bonine, Isaac, experience with elk 32 

Boots, James F., experience with mule deer.. 45 

Boselaphus tragocamelus 13 

Bradley, Herbert, killed by deer 48 

Buckland Park, New Jersey 50 

Buffalo, extermination 27 

Bull,H. C, killed by elk 38 

Canada, export of park deer 53 

Caribou, barren-ground 16 

woodland 16 

Carroll, W. J 17 

Caton, J. D 12, 31, 38, 39, 45 

Cephalophus 14 

Cervulus muntjac 24 

Cervus asiaticus 21 

axis 23, 45 

canadensis 19, 25 

unicolor 23 

Chinese water deer 24 

Chital 23 

Colorado, private parks 56 

Corbin preserve ( Blue Mountain Park) ... 19, 28, 57 

Cuppy herd of deer in Iowa 54 

Danger of introducing foreign animals 24 

Deer, Acapulco 45 

Columbia black-tailed 21 

crating for shipment 48 

exotic , 21 



Page. 

Deer, fallow 21 

family, importance 14 

food 47 

hair 15 

mule 20 

North American 16 

park at Roanoke, N. C 41 

parks, early 40 

effect on game supply 51 

Pere David 23 

red 21 

small 24 

Virginia 20, 40 

white-tailed 20,40 

management 46 

Deerhorn, uses 15 

Deerskins 15 

Dieterich, Charles F., experience with deer. . 53 

v. Fargo, case of. 53 

Domestication of antelope 12 

caribou 16 

elk 20,29 

mammals 8 

aesthetic reason for 9 

for use in agriculture and trans- 
portation 10 

for food 10 

for fur 10 

selection of species 10 

moose 18 

white-tailed deer 20,40 

Downing, A. J., on native deer for parks 40 

Duikers 14 

Eland 13 

Elaphuras davidianus 23 

Elk 19,25 

castration 39 

clearing out underbrush 35 

cost 37 

enmity toward wolves and dogs 39 

fence 34,37 

flesh 26 

food 37 

gestation 26 

habits 25 

hybrids 28 

in Adirondacks 28 

in eastern United States 27 

in Ozark Mountains 33 

management 36 

parks 36 

preservation 26 

range 19 

Rocky Mountain 19, 25 

round-horned 19, 25 

venison 26 

vicious male 38 

weight 34 

Wyoming herds : 25 

Exotic species, introduction of 24 

Fence for deer - 44 

61 



62 



INDEX. 



Page. 

Fence for elk 34, 37 

Florida, law protecting private parks 56 

Food of deer 46 

of elk 25 

Foreign animals, objections to introduction of. 24 

Fur, rearing mammals for 10 

Game in Maine 26 

preserves, private 51 

state 51 

propagation 7, 52 

Gazelles 13,14 

Gestation of elk 26 

muntjacs 24 

white-tailed deer 46 

Gilbert, J. W., experience with elk 32 

Good, Geo. S., quoted 55 

Goodnight, Charles, quoted 43, 46 

Grenfell, W. T., experiments with reindeer. . 17 

Griggs, John W., experience with deer 42, 46 

Harris, R . H . , experience with deer 43 

Hill, Joshua, experience with elk 32 

Hippotragus leucophseus 9 

Hornaday, W. T., quoted 18 

Hybrids, deer 21,23,45 

elk 28 

Hydrelaphus inermis 24 

Illinois, deer from parks 56 

Increase of deer in domestication 45 

Indiana, deer from parks 56 

Introduction of foreign animals 24 

Iowa, protection of park deer 56 

Jackson, Sheldon, introduction of reindeer. . . 17 

Japanese sika 22 

Kellogg, T. D., tame elk 31 

Kentucky, protection of game in parks 56 

Killing deer in private parks 53 

Land not utilized 40 

Laws affecting game propagation 52 

McKeen, W. R., experience with deer 42 

Maine, permits to tame game 56 

Management of elk 36 

Virginia deer 46 

March, C. W., experience in shipping deer. . . 48 

Massachusetts, killing tame deer 56 

Mercer, John, elk in Maryland 29 

Michigan, protection of park deer 56 

Minnesota, private parks 56 

Missouri, tame deer 57 

Moose 18 

Mule deer 20, 45 

Muntjacs 24 

New Hampshire, Blue Mountain Park 57 

New York, deer from parks 57 

Nilgai 13 

North Carolina, park deer 57 

North Dakota, parks 57 

Nowlin, D. C, quoted concerning antelope. . 11 

Odocoileus columbianus 21 

hemionus 20 

toltecus : 45 

virginianus 20, 40 

v. couesi 47 

Oklahoma, deer from parks 57 

Otzinachson Rod and Gun Club 50, 55 

Parks, private, for deer 50 

laws relating to private 55 

Peking sika 23 

Pennsylvania, private parks 57 



Page. 

Pere David deer 23 

Powerscourt, Lord, experience with Japanese 

deer 22 

experience with Sambar deer 23 

Preservation of species a reason for domesti- 
cation 9 

Private deer preserves 55 

ownership of deer 55 

Protection of antelope 12 

Pronghorn 11 

Pseudaxis hortolorum 23 

nippon 22 

Quagga, extinction 9 

Range of American antelope 11 

elk 19 

moose 18 

mule deer 20 

white-tailed deer 20 

suitable for elk 36 

Rangifer arcticus 16 

caribou 16 

tarandus 16 

Reasons for domesticating mammals 9 

Reindeer, Alaska 17 

Labrador 17 

Newfoundland 17 

Roosevelt, Theodore, quoted 39 

Roseberry, C. H., experience with deer 44 

Russ, Geo. W., on raising elk 33 

Sale of venison from parks 54 

St. Louis Park and Agricultural Company... 33,45 

Sambar, Indian 23 

Sika, Japanese 22 

Peking 23 

South Dakota, private parks 58 

Species suitable for domestication 10 

State game preserves 51 

laws relating to private ownership of 

deer 55 

Stratton, E. L., domestication of elk 31 

Stratton, Lorenzo, domestication of elk 29, 36 

Taurotragus 13 

Tielenius, Carl, experience with elk 28, 33 

Transportation of live deer 52 

venison 52 

use of mammals 10 

Trapping deer for shipment /.... 49 

Trouessart, E., domesticating mammals 8 

Tuley, Joseph, elk in Virginia 29 

Venison, digestibility 14 

elk 26 

from parks, sale 54 

Vermont, deer from parks 58 

Vicious deer 47 

elk 38 

Wapiti 19 

Altai 21 

North American 19, 25 

habits 25 

Weber case 54 

Wetmore, M. C, experience with elk 33 

Wilson, F. J. , experience with elk 32 

White-tailed deer 20, 40 

Whitney, William C 20,28 

Wisconsin, private parks 58 

Woburn Abbey, parks of Duke of Bedford . . 13, 

14, 22, 23 
Worthington, Charles C 47, 49, 50, 51 



o 



